Job Justification and the AFL

Blog note: I have been asked by BigFooty.com to post blog entries twice a week on AFL, and I'll reproduce them here. That is why there will be a lot of footy blog posts over the next seven months. I'll try to still post about other stuff when I can. Apologies to my non-footy constituency.

My previous job (other than football authority) was with a government statutory authority. This organisation shared a Human Resources department (known as "People and Culture") with another statutory authority which worked roughly in same area as mine did.

This HR department was well resourced (unlike some other "operational" areas of our organisation), and went around ensuring we upheld the organisations values, knew our rights and responsibilities regarding all manner of things that had little to do with our day-to-day work.

I envisaged them sitting in their office cubicles, or more likely in one of their 34 meetings for the day, trying to brainstorm things to do so they could feel and look important, and more importantly, indispensible. When all we needed was someone to make sure we got paid on time, made sure our leave balances were correct, and then left us alone to make the world a better place.

I get the same feeling when I think of Adrian Anderson. News from the AFL is that at the Telstra Dome/Etihad Stadium/Docklands/ for the remainder of the NAB Cup, the crowd will be able to see how long there is to go in a quarter by viewing a countdown clock located on the scoreboard.

Who thought of this, and more importantly, what identified problem does this solve? Most people I know love the uncertainty of the end of a quarter, especially at the end of a game when it is tight.

But this is only typical of the noise coming from Harbour Esplanade. Hawthorn, keen to utilise a glut of silky left footers in their back half, rush a few behinds in a Grand Final. The problem isn't that big, and the easy, quick solution (stopping those who rush the behind from kicking it in) is ignored, instead responsibility is placed upon umpires to make a judgement call about player intent, and now we have a deliberately rushed behind infringement.

Sydney have 19 men on the field for 30 seconds at the end of a game, and the extra player arguably has an effect on the result of the game, which is a draw. Instead of accepting a quick, effective solution (docking Sydney two points), the AFL throws out decades of precedent (and not for the first time - see StK v Freo 2006) and radically alters how players interchange on and off the field.

And so it goes. I sat next to Adrian Anderson on a train to the cricket on December 27, and he really struck me as a man full of his own importance (and he really looks like his brother, who was with him).

It is clear that he feels a need to justify his existence, at a time when interest in the game and attendances are at an all-time high. But someone in a role like his doing no tweaking to a game that doesn't need it is a man on borrowed time. So we keep changing rules, adding "innovations", and so on.

The rushed behind change is a classic example. Instead of trying to limit the number of judgement calls an umpire needs to make in a game, thus making the game easier to umpire and minimising mistakes, the AFL under Anderson's stewardship goes the other way. It's just ridiculous.

What we need now is what a lot of players have been saying for a while: time. Some time without changes, for the game to organically and holistically evolve, and for problems to sort themselves out. And if that makes Adrian Anderson superfluous, then so be it.

Small Poppy Syndrome

You have to endure many things as a St Kilda supporter. In many respects, it is a calling, or to take the half-glass-empty approach, an ordeal.

Just in my nearly 29 years, I have had to put up with:

• Not beating Essendon until I was in High School
• Losing that final to Geelong in 1991 because Gary Ablett was always more like the Old Testament "Vengeful" God than the New Testament compassionate god (see N Burke)
• Seeing Nicky Winmar almost walk out on the club in 1993, mere weeks after his (and Gilbert McAdam's) heroics at Victoria Park
• Seeing Ken Sheldon and Stan Alves dumped as coach before their time
• Seeing Tim Watson coach at all
• Seeing Malcolm Blight get lured by money
• Seeing Rod Butterss go completely b@tshit insane
• Nicky Winmar and Stewart Loewe's 1997 Grand Final Week
• Darren Jarman
• For that matter, pre-2008 Adam Schneider
• Barry Hall cheating his way to a Premiership (he dropped his opponent, took an uncontested mark and kicked a goal, and the punch was officially ruled illegal, so he cheated)
• Trent Knobel, and Cain Ackland post 2005
• Seeing Brent Guerra in a Hawthorn jumper (with hair)

How long do you have, I could keep going on and on and on .....

But you know what I hate the most?

The people who hate St Kilda.

And do you know why this rankles with me the most?

Because they have no good reason to.

Many people hate Collingwood. They are many good reasons. In the period 1960-1981 they made the Grand Final eight times, so they were pretty good through that period. And the Collingwood Army does self-promotion better than most.

Essendon dominated the competition in the 1980s, and St Kilda particularly. Kevin Sheedy coached Essendon to victories in his first 20 encounters with St Kilda, finishing his long coaching career with 33 wins and only 8 losses. And Essendon supporters let everyone know about it. This is why I hate Essendon.

But why would anyone hate St Kilda? I just don't get it.At the Olympics in Sydney in 2000, "Eric the Eel" got quite a bit of media for his unflattering performance in the 100m freestyle, taking only slightly less time to swim the distance than Susie Moroney would take to swim the English Channel. But he participated, wasn't hurting anyone, exemplified the Olympic value of taking part, and was sort of cute.

On the other hand, American swimmer Gary Hall Jr predicted the Americans would play the Aussie swimmers like a guitar in the 4X100m freestyle relay, an event they had never lost before those Olympics. The Aussies, behind a world record from Michael Klim and an amazing anchor leg from Ian Thorpe, took the gold medal.

Now, by reckoning, hating St Kilda is like hating Eric the Eel. He's embarrassing, he's making a mockery of the competition, he should be confined to anonymity where he belongs.

The AFL's efforts to make the competition more even have been advantageous to a club like St Kilda. But that is making up for years of neglect and worse by the league, including removing the Peninsula from our recruting zone in the mid 1960s, robbing us of Leigh Matthews and Dermott Brereton.

Hating St Kilda is hating the little guy. Hating the unemployed. Hating the refugee. Hating the famine stricken.

I'll be happy for the hecklers to hate us when we are winning premierships, which I hope (but do not expect to) starts this year.

We have a lot to put up with as St Kilda supporters, so much so that at times I have seen little kids trudging out of another St Kilda loss and felt compelled to grab them and yell, "Stop barracking for St Kilda, before you get emotionally attached and it's too late!" But we don't need to put up with Carlton, Collingwood and Essendon supporters, whose history is far from blot-less, telling us we have no right to be in the league, or dredging up old, murky incidents. Just let us barrack in peace.

The NAB Cup Ramblings

With apologies to my man Bill Simmons, otherwise known as ESPN's "The Sports Guy", here are my random thoughts about the first (three) weeks of the NAB Cup...

I think I'd take a blood transfusion from Amy Winehouse before I put money on Sydney to win a NAB Cup match.

If you are an AFL footballer, you may want to think twice before bumping another player.

Geelong are going to be hard to beat this pre-season.

Watch out, AFL, Brendan Goddard is coming.

It may be a slow start to the season for the Doggies.

Are Carlton the Tiger Woods of the AFL pre-season, or is Tiger Woods the Carlton of golf? I thought so.

Jarryd Roughead may kick more goals this season than Lance Franklin.

Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins Ben Cousins

If you thought no one paid any attention to the Dockers before this season, you haven't seen anything yet. They may get 10,000 to Melbourne v Fremantle if lucky.

How long will it take the West Coast Eagles to forgive themselves for picking Nick Natanui over Daniel Rich? 10 years? 15 years?

Kudos to Kelli Underwood, who called Saturday's game with the amount of excitement a football match in February deserves. (And, no, I'm not being sarcastic.)

It'll be a cold, cold day in Hell before the AFL moves a NAB Cup game for a A-League Grand Final again.

2009 - A Year for Firsts

Allow me to go all introspective for a while. Permit me, if you will, a little self-indulgence. Well, considering what I usually right, a little more self-indulgence than usual.

For all intents and purposes, 2009 looms as the best year of my life. You see, I'm getting married, an event which a small, now dead, part of me thought unlikely to ever happen. While trying unsuccessfully most of the time to avoid cliches, I really do feel like the luckiest man on Earth. And because of what is happening this year, perhaps the busiest.

Getting married is something that is, to a certain extent, within your control. Once you find yourself in the right circumstances, you can decide to get married, or not to get married.

Likewise, you can decide to have children or not to have children. To change jobs or stay in a job. To eat a roast beef sandwich or ... you get the idea.

When I think about all the things I want the most in my life, I can conjure up some way through which I can have control over the realisation of that goal. I can work harder, choose more wisely, talk to the right people, come down on the right side of an issue. All except one.

I have no control over whether St Kilda wins a premiership or not.

How frustrating this must be for Saints supporters. We can buy our membership, attend club functions, buy club merchandise, and so on. But that only has a small affect on the club's on field fortunes. We can send positive vibes down to Moorabbin, but that's getting into the highly untested category.

I'm nearly 29, and hopefully have plenty of good years ahead of me. But I really want to see a St Kilda flag. I mean, I reaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaallllllllllllllllly want to see a St Kilda flag.

Last year's final series was a long feat of endurance, as I battled an uneasy nervousness and excited nausea about five weeks, right from the moment we beat Adelaide. Then came the overwhelming greatness of beating Essendon by 18 goals to finish fourth, the expected capitulation to Geelong, the equally expected rebound against Collingwood, and the long, drawn out death rattle to our season and Robert Harvey's playing career against Hawthorn.

And yet, we didn't get there. At testing times like these, one's thoughts turn inwards, asking questions such as "what more can I do?". The sober conclusion is very little. People like to use we when talking about their sporting teams, but as Jerry Seinfeld put it, "they play, you watch".

I don't particularly want to go through that ordeal again. It won't be like that once we win one. But will we win one? I mean, will St Kilda win one while I watch, in the stands?

Well, let the karma battle begin. I'm drawing the line in the sand now. I'm pushing all my chips in the table. I'm all in. If you're with me, say it now, otherwise, you're out.

This year will be the best year of my life. I'm going to get married. And St Kilda are going to win the premiership.

Quick Plug

If you like quilts and helping people, go to

http://pinsandthimbles.wordpress.com/2009/02/13/how-to-help-when-theres-no-way-to-help/

and bid on Anne's quilt, which is up for auction and of whose proceeds will go to help the victims of the bushfires here in Victoria.

Squad to tour South Africa

Here's my take on who should be the 14 men to go to South Africa for the three match test series beginning this month:

Simon Katich - probably Australia's most important batsman at the moment
Phil Hughes - he may struggle, may even get dropped, but all the great ones get back
Ricky Ponting (c) - his batting is where it needs to be, but his captaincy needs to improve
Michael Clarke (vc) - and he needs to start batting at four
Michael Hussey - a move to five would relieve some of the pressure
Andrew McDonald - did enough in Sydney, his bowling clearly superior to Symonds
Brad Haddin (wk) - had plenty of form with the bat during the test series
Mitchell Johnson - hopefully the longer form of the game will suit him
Bryce McGain - after his performance v South Africa, he simply must go
Doug Bollinger - deserves another crack
Peter Siddle - certainly the honest trundler Australia needs
Callum Ferguson - elevation into ODI squad indicates selectors are warming to him
Ben Hilfenhaus - may get to play if green top produced or if Bollinger falters
Cameron White - provides flexibility, extra bat, possibly extra bowler

The last position is the toughest, because the selectors may be tempted to take six specialist bowlers out of a squad of 14. Personally I think they should be taking 15 to provide more flexibility, meaning they had two other options with bat and ball. Also the back up batsman proved tough to choose, but Ferguson has done enough to deserve to tour. I believe it's more important to swap Clarke and M Hussey in the batting order. D Hussey simply hasn't done enough in the ODIs to warrant a tour place.

UPDATE - I got 12 out of 14 right, with Marcus North and Nathan Hauritz instead of Cameron White and Callum Ferguson.

Change and Obama

Barack Obama has been President of the United States for about two weeks, but already he has hit the first rocks on what will be a pretty turbulent Presidency.

News comes from the US that his nominee for the post of Secretary of Health and Human Services, former Senate Majority Leader Tom Daschle, has withdrawn his nomination due to questions about his tax records. Obama had already lost one proposed nominee in New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, who was to be Secretary of Commerce.

Obama won the election running a campaign pledging change. He pledged to do things differently, in order to produce different results. Obama said he would turn his back on the Washington elite, the insiders, the lobbyists. He would create a new way of governing.

Now, despite my admiration for Obama as a thinker and an orator, I took these comments with a grain of salt. Not because I underestimate Obama the man - he just got elected President of the United States, tough under any circumstances, but even tougher when you are a person of colour. No, I doubted whether he would be able to carry out this pledge because of the great entrenchment of the American political system.

The US Congress, despite being dominated by Democrats, is still there, with its committee systems and the Senate with its filibustering. The US Constitution still provides the separation of powers it always has, and Obama will still need to get important measures approved and passed by both houses on Capitol Hill.

But, above all that, is that when you look for people to work for you, you look first to people with experience in the areas in which you are dealing. Despite Obama's campaign rhetoric, these people are the Washington elite, the insiders, the lobbyists. People like Richardson and Daschle.

And then there is how people in America get elected to public office. There is so much money and influence flowing through Washington that to get a fair, objective analysis of proposed measures is almost impossible. Put simply, elected officials need to dance with the one that brung them.

Obama's great achievement in shedding this money and influence was to use low level internet fundraising to collect massive amounts of money for his campaign. Most of the campaign funds were donated by people giving amounts as small as $20. This means that Obama was at the beck-and-call of no great interest group, no lobbyists and no multinational corporations. Unfortunately, that cannot be said for almost everyone else in Washington.

Obama faces a tough four (but, probably eight) years, but, then again, being President is a tough job. Will he succeed in fundamentally changing the way America is governed? I doubt it. However, change always happens in small increments.

A thing isn't the absence of that thing

Now, as you who know me well already know, I'm a Catholic. And those of you who know me better will also know that it's a personal thing, and I'm not really interested in participating in mass-scale conversion of people to the flock.

But today I'm going to take up the flag for my people, and also people of all religions.

A story in The Spencer Street Soviet (otherwise known as The Melbourne Red, or The Age) today, which it has picked up from it's sibling newspaper in Britain, The Guardian, informs one that double decker buses in London now carrying advertising for atheism. They read "There's probably no God. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life". You can find the article here.

Now, while I agree with the sentiment of the latter part of the message, I'm not happy with the advertisement. In fact, I'm not happy with atheism in general. Recently, it's been charting an interesting course.

Due to people like Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens, atheism has received plenty of publicity. Both agree that religion is the basis of most of the world's problems, and because God plainly doesn't exist, this is a problem that can be easily solved by the eradication of religion.

I call this "fundamentalist atheism". Just as other fundamentalists in other religions want to eradicate all the other religions (and atheists for that matter), these people want only atheism to survive.

There is only one problem with my analogy - atheism isn't a religion. It's the absence of one.

When the Church of England publicises Christ or God, it is publicising something. Atheists are publicising the absence of something. It's like selling an empty coke bottle.

I know plenty of atheists. Hell (not a swear word when talking about atheists as they don't believe it exists), I'm even marrying one. But they don't promote atheism. In fact, they talk little about God of their own accord. They may talk about the evil in the world that organised religion is responsible for, and that is fair comment. But they're not actively recruiting people to be Godless.

Paul Keating is quoted as saying (and this is about the only time I'll quote PJK in an argument I'm making), "If God doesn't exist, why isn't everyone just chasing women and antiques?", these being the two most desirable things in his mind, apparently.

Organised religions, or "faith traditions" as some people call them (urghh), have been responsible for, how does one put it, some bad shit. But they're also responsible for some incredible goodness as well. Personally, I think that is how God works on Earth, through people doing good works and being charitable. Jesus didn't call on us to be good to the poor because he wanted to change the world order or bring about social equity: He called us to do good works because it brought us closer to God. But that is another story for another day and another audience.

A few weeks ago a story ran in the local papers that the Humanist Society was about to receive permission from the Department of Education to run a "religious" education course at state primary schools that advocated the absence of God.

Now, I'm a secularist, and I don't believe religious education should be taught at schools operated by the government. But they certainly shouldn't be permitting what amounts to a "non-religious" education course to be run at a state school. It should be up to parents to provide guidance with regards to religious beliefs and greater meaning. It should also be noted that relying on parents to do parenting isn't exactly the most successful strategy at the moment.

Simply put, I don't think atheism should be put on the same level as religious belief. Actually, I think on the census the box you tick should just be " No Religion". If you don't believe in a religion, then you have no religion. Atheism is not a religion. It's the promotion of nothing. Now stop worrying and enjoy your life.

3rd Test and 20/20 ODI squads

Some quick thoughts....

- Graeme Smith is one tough hombre, as Dennis Commetti would say. Great effort to go out and bat, and nearly save the match. Much deserved Man of the Series.
- Siddle and Johnson are keepers, but this attack (with Stuart Clark and Ben Hilfenhaus) will look more like Australia's attack 1989-1991 than 1999-2001. Jury out on Bollinger, but plenty of time yet.
- My current fourteen man squad for South Africa tests - Ponting (c), Clarke (vc), Hughes, Katich, M Hussey, Symonds, McDonald, D Hussey, Haddin, Siddle, Johnson, Clark, Hilfenhaus, McGain. Bollinger, Hauritz & Krejza unlucky, but we need a wrist spinner for South Africa and England.
- Good move to rest Mitchell Johnson for a couple of weeks. Also good move to select Hauritz for 20/20 and one dayers, but can't see how he plays with that squad.
- Michael Clarke to open batting in first two one dayers, ahead of Brad Haddin or James Hopes.
- 20/20 matches to be split, Aussies to win one day series 3-2, mainly due to absence of Graeme Smith.

Silence is not golden

The end of 2008 couldn't come quickly enough for the Australian Cricket Team. From a familiar position on Day 2 of the WACA Test Match (and the MCG Test Match for that matter), the Aussies couldn't seal the deal, failing mostly with the ball, but also with the bat, particularly in the 2nd innings in Melbourne, where even Ricky Ponting's 99 was disappointing, given he got out to such an obvious set-up.

What was more disappointing about Ponting's dismissal, even more disappointing than how it happened, was his reaction. He wandered off the pitch a beaten man. It was the same reaction that came from a brave Brett Lee when he heard Billy Doctrove call no-ball after he bowled Neil McKenzie late on the fourth evening. They just seemed defeated.

Watching the DVD of the first 16-match winning streak enjoyed by the Australian Test Team from October 1999 until March 2001, I noticed Ponting's reaction when he was out for 197 in Perth versus Pakistan, playing a similar shot. He was ropable with himself, screaming "no" loudly as he walked angrily off the ground. That was the reaction of a man not defeated, and not satisfied. Ponting reaction was more like a surrender in Melbourne, despite the fact he had made 98 fewer runs. He had given it his best shot, and almost looked comfortable with the fact that it wasn't good enough.

Another astonishing thing I read during the Boxing Day Test Match was an article by Robert Craddock in the Hun. He reported than when Graeme Smith, the South African captain, walked off after batting in Perth, he couldn't believe how quiet it was. Very little chatter, and certainly no talk directed at unsettling the batsman.

It is not a long bow to draw to say that this all goes back to match in Sydney 12 months ago. That match caused a national outcry, but not at the man who had made a racial slur, or his team, but ours, for playing the game while taking no prisoners.

Andrew Symonds had nicked a ball to the keeper and not walked. What terrible form to rely on the umpire to do his job! Imagine an AFL footballer throwing a lunging foot at a ball, getting close, the ball bouncing through the goals, and then the footballer telling the umpire he didn't get a foot to it? No, one expects better behaviour from a cricketer, although there is more money involved and also the little question of national pride.

There was no great ourpouring of approval when Symonds got a howler of a decision in Adelaide and walked off the field without comment or visable dissent. Of course, everything that is wrong with Symonds' cricket career can also be traced back to the New Year's Test Match of 2008.

The massive media reaction last year has resulted in the Aussies having their verbal tail between their legs. I can't imagine a Steve Waugh team reacting the same way; he would have called a spade a spade, said something about being paid to win games of cricket, and carried on as if the fuss had never happened.

Since Michael Clarke bowled Australia to victory late on the Sunday afternoon, Australia has won only four test matches, all against the West Indies or New Zealand, and lost five, all against India or South Africa. Like it or not, the Aussies are at best third in the world at the moment.

Sure, there have been some personnel problems. We can't find a quality spinner. Fast bowlers keep getting hurt and changing, but during the first 16 game winning streak, Australia played McGrath, Fleming, Muller, Kasprowicz, Lee, Bichel & Gillespie. Two sides of quicks, with a 12th Man thrown in. During the 2nd 16 game winning streak, Australia played quicks McGrath, Lee, Kasprowicz, Clark, Gillespie & Mitchell Johnson. You need a good squad of players.

Shane Warne said before the Sydney match that the Aussies bowlers need to recapture some aggression on the field. That could well start with the verbal aggression, although it is hard to see newbies Bollinger or Siddle, or the seemingly patholigically friendly (and incredibly lucky) Andrew McDonald doing that. Johnson has been growing into that role, and he looms as one of the three most vital members of that team, along with captain and vice-captain.

In the final analysis, the players are paid to play and win. When they won the Sydney match 12 months ago, it was almost like they had caused some sort of international incident. Firstly, it was that awful little Indian who caused the "incident". However, it was Australian heads that were being called for. If Ponting should be sacked, it should be for poor captaining, not waiting for the umpire's decision, pressing home every advantage he can, and verballing his opponents. The Australians need to forget about the events of Sydney 2008, and once again make a cricket field full of Australians an uncomfortable place to be.