An elegy for Carles Puyol, part 2: on Paul Chapman and personal reflections

Also for my sister.

I first heard of Carles Puyol in the winter of 2003, well before my world soccer fixation had taken root. I was visiting my sister, who had lived for a year in Barcelona, and she told me with absolute certainty that she was going to marry a footballer that she called “the Poo”, Carles Puyol.

“It’s OK” she told me, “none of the other girls will like him, he’s ugly”. The ugly part may have been true (I think of him more as “designer unkempt”) but Carles Puyol was steeped in Catalan colours and already a local icon; she was also pretty seriously involved with a local Francophone.

Suffice to say, my brother in law has never played for Barcelona, at least not to my ken.

Vale, Matthew Scarlett

Matthew Scarlett has retired from AFL football.  By doing so, we must farewell a brilliant - if genuinely odd - champion of the sport.  He is joined in retirement by Premiership teammates Joel Corey and David Wojcinski.  The trio - Scarlett especially - leave behind many fond memories of the wonderful Cats era of 2007-2012.

And as Scarlett ambles into the Torquay half-light, the accompanying sound you hear is the death rattle of greatest era in Geelong Football Club's history.  Any player in the 2007 and 2009 Premiership sides was replaceable, bar him.  In fact, when the Cats won the 2011 flag to make it their third in five, many of the original entertainers had already been superseded: Cam Mooney, Darren Milburn, Tom Harley.  Even Little Gary.  The only legatees of a team that was both truly great and startlingly deep are James Bartel, Joel Selwood, Corey Enright and - for another year, anyway - Paul Chapman.

Scarlett the Younger came to the Cats in the 1997 draft.  I had the pleasure of witnessing his first game, in the last round of 1998, where he played Matthew Lloyd straight up.  He was overmatched by the spearhead ascendant, but fought gamely and was rarely - if ever - beaten by the Lloyd again.  By 2000, Scarlett was integral, the ultimate answer to Geelong's perpetual full-back problem.

flickr.com/photos/jamesdphotography

He started as a resolute stopper but as his younger teammates matured, so did his game.  No longer required only to defend, Scarlett developed into the game's most effective offensive full-back, without any decrease in defensive responsibility (or result).  Several factors helped this evolution, including a possession-heavy game, a swarm of tacklers, the Cats' zonal marking and outstanding teammates like Tom Harley, Darren Milburn, Matthew Egan and now Harry Taylor.

It was this ability to produce wave after wave of attack while not sacrificing positional defence that made Scarlett the best full-back of all time.  No full-back has combined attack and defence so perfectly.  He was precise in disposal, had the ability to gut-run and understood when to do so and the bodily strength to wrangle down opposing power forwards.  He was also clutch.  Ask Buddy Franklin, who from 2008 to 2011 dominated Geelong defenders - until it was Scarlett's turn to stand him.

Or ask St. Kilda.

For over a hundred years, full-backs were nothing but stoppers.  The player selected in that position in the AFL's Team of the Century in 1996, Steven Silvagni, could barely kick forty metres.  Let alone run, bounce and deliver a pinpoint pass.  The position changed because of Scarlett and his contemporary Dustin Fletcher - full-backs are now so much more than taggers who stand next to the goals.  Although their methods differed - and, obviously, my preference was Scarlett's - the influence they exerted across the entire ground rather than just within 35 metres of the goals, make them the best the game has seen.

No-one can replicate what Matthew Scarlett has done for his club, nor could they redefine the position the way he did.  He was the ultimate full-back.

Change the Father-Son rule

There great red sandy plains are rumbling.  It appears Melbourne Football Club will have to use the 3rd overall selection in this year's AFL draft to select Jack Viney, the son of former captain Todd.

Viney, courtesy: The Age

Before 2007, the promising sons of former club greats were available pre-draft to their father's club at the cost of that club's third-round selection.  That system changed to a "bid" system in 2007, where, should another club guarantees Viney selection in a certain round - say, the first - then the Demons have to match that offer and select the player with their own pick in the same round.  Melbourne has the third pick in this year's draft - meaning if another club values Jack Viney as a first-rounder, the Demons have to pick him third or lose him.

The "bid" system was implemented in response to Geelong adding Tom Hawkins via the old rule.  The power forward would almost certainly have been drafted first overall and arrived at a club already boasting Father-Son picks Gary Ablett Jr, Nathan Ablett, Matthew Scarlett and Mark Blake.  The Cats - who had decided consciously to re-embrace their past and locality -  were seen to be favoured so much that the rule was changed (never mind that the Abletts would have been third-round picks at best, while Scarlett and Blake probably wouldn't have been drafted if not their connexion to the Cats)*.

The Cats were rewarded for embracing their history.  Alongside the five listed above, they have also selected the sons of Andrew Bews, Terry Callan, Michael Woolnough, Garry Fletcher and Larry Donohue.  Of those five, four were busts and Bews is far from the final product.

Gary Ablett Jr, courtesy Wikipedia

The old rule was shouted down when some clubs got jealous - and with ample justification.  Adelaide is yet to select a Father-Son player in twenty-plus years of drafting, while Fremantle has only Brett Peake from seventeen.  A standard system, still at a significant cost - say, the old third-round pick - is fair, just as long as interstate clubs are able to participate as well.  However, drawing players from the SANFL and WAFL is more complex - nobody wants another Bryce Gibbs fiasco.  Perhaps an adequate compromise could be a total of games (200?) in which they play the majority (135-150?) with one of one "feeder" clubs.

The current rule places all the advantage in the hands of opposing teams, rather than the team who should benefit from their past.  At best, a bidding team gets a draft pick at market value.  At worst, they force the "parent" club into the contrived position of potentially mortgaging a part of their future against their past greats - a tricky situation.  The only sons now selected are generally "can't miss" prospects like Mitch Wallis, Joe Daniher and Jack Viney.  Without the Father-Son rule in 1997, the Cats wouldn't have unearthed the greatest full-back in history**.

The league shouldn't penalise clubs for drafting family.  It runs opposite to the family atmosphere the AFL has so successfully created.  History should be celebrated, rather than becoming a burden - it's great that the Western Bulldogs Footscray fans can see Liberatore and Wallace combine again, while the sight of Scarlett to Bews to Little Gary to Hawkins is a great callback to the free-flowing Cats of the1980s.

It isn't a retrograde step to look back fondly on history.  Embracing one's past is a concept that underlies a healthy collective - so it's time for the AFL to allow clubs to do so without penalty.

* You got me, I'm a Geelong supporter - but have felt this way since the rule was changed.
** Yes, I'm biased, but if you want I can give you a dozen reasons why.

AFL Finals predictions

by Matthew Wood and Ben Roberts

Collingwood - undoubted number 1 chance for the premiership. Thomas missing the first week will not hurt them that much.

Matt's take:  The most fancied side to repeat since the Lions' against the Pies in 2002.  There's not a single weakness in their squad and, crucially, they have depth in their lower list - a "foot soldier" can be adequately replaced, rather than bringing in real rookies. 

Geelong - Realise I could end up with egg on my face on this one, but their second place on the ladder is a bit of a furphy promoted by a true home ground advantage at Kardinia Park. Have watched them a few times this year and they look old, coupled with being shorn of Abletts they lack the 'zazz' that made them unstoppable at times during 2007-2010. Its no shame - they have had their period in the sun and based on the AFL model may have gone longer at the top than reasonably expected. (EIC Matt currently yelling 'tag me in, tag me in!' WWF-style). That being said as Nick Davis once tried to say 'Form is temporary, class is permanent' (still not sure who he was referring to). Despite age, there is still class at the Cattery and they remain a chance. Number 4 challenger for Collingwood.

Matt's take:  I reckon the Cats have peaked for the year, but still probably have what it takes to be reckoned Collingwood's greatest threat.  They have a multitude of forward options - who never seem to fire at once, unless we're playing Melbourne/Gold Coast - and a defence which, while aging, can shut down the best.  The midfield - formerly a strength - is now the greatest question mark no matter how good Kelly, Bartel and Selwood are.  Strangely, stalwart fringe players David Wojcinski and Shannon Byrnes may be the players most vital to a successful finals campaign.

Hawthorn - I saw the Hawks last weekend and have pegged them as the Number 1 challenger for Collingwood. They are as hard at the ball as any side, their weakness is in their skills. If their skills are good, they have the best chance of beating anyone. They were awful by hand and foot on Saturday, but by force of effort just kept pushing the ball forward. Hodge is brilliant at winning the ball in close and Franklin is amazing, particularly when the game needs him to do something amazing. Then they have 20 other 'foot soldiers' playing as harder football as I have seen.

Matt's take:  If only they weren't injury-prone.  I can't agree with Ben's lack of skill comment as they are perhaps the most precise mid-to-long range kicking squad in the league.  Their trump card, as always, is Buddy Franklin and if he gets quality supply from Lewis, Sewell et al, the Hawks leap the Cats as threats.  Jam the midfield and Buddy doesn't get the chances - it's all so easy in theory, isn't it?

West Coast - Surprise packet of the season. Helped by fortress Subiaco - but only will get one final there at most. Number 2 Challenger for Collingwood. Inexperience will also count against them but they are pretty much assured of a preliminary final spot. Prelims and Granny's are far more a lottery than the other finals - in fact I don't think coaches can do much after semi-finals which is why I reckon the dogs sacking Eade is the wrong call an completely unfair. If the weather is fine, Nick Nat puts on a show for the ages they could do the business.

Matt's take:  Famously, half-way through the 1996 season, Rodney Eade was asked if his Swans could go all the way to the Grand Final.  His reply was "No, I don't think so - history says you need to have a few seasons in the finals before you make [that] leap".  The Swans surprised, but my guess it actually applies here - the Eagles have to travel and don't do that as well as in their 2004-07 heyday. If they surprise Collingwood in Week One, they're a chance to go all the way but, with Collingwood, that's a really big "if".

Carlton - For the first time in ages, a team outside the Top Four may be a decent chance (say, greater than 5%) to win it all.  And there are two (StK is the other)! Can challenge Collingwood in the midfield, but are let down by a strictly-average defence and the fact Brett Thornton still gets a game. Inconsistent as any team in the finals. On their day, devastating, but when they're not on they are abysmal and too reliant upon Chris Judd. Number 3 Challenger for Collingwood is a a choice of youth over experience (Geelong), but I'll go with it. Believe Brett Ratten (like Dean Laidley was) is a coach who can only develop a team so far, and he has hit his ceiling. Trade tip - Bryce Gibbs back to Adelaide (hometown and club needing class), for Kurt Tippett (Carlton needing a stronger key forward than Waite).

Matt's take: They'll make a Preliminary Final, at least - because one of the teams above them will slip up.  They have the beating of Essendon in Week One (cop that, Bomber!) and, should their Top Four opponent not be on the ball - I'm looking at you, Corio Bay - then they will surprise.  Partly also because Judd/Murphy is becoming the New New Judd/Cousins, replacing Ablett/Bartel.  I love Ben's trade idea, as well. 

St Kilda - When I saw the Cats play the Saints at the 'G in June, it was perhaps the most painful night of my life. They were horrible and I vowed they would never win the flag with as morose an individual as Ross Lyon as coach. They had no second gear, plan B or creative vision that night apart from setting records for the number of taggers they employed. They have improved, winning six straight, and are even showing some attacking flair. This though only rates them Number 5 Challenger for Collingwood.

Matt's take: It will take superhuman efforts from Nick Riewoldt and co. to vault them into Preliminary Final week.  In opposition to Collingwood, their recruitment policy has been shown up for its horrible flaws - they have great blue chip talent (Riewoldt, Goddard etc) but players 30-40 on their list may as well play for Balwyn in the EFL.  

Sydney - Only the spirit that they can show when not the favourites gives them a whiff, but Adam Goodes is petulant when things aren't going his way. Number 6 challenger for Collingwood.

Matt's take: Can we play every game in Sydney?  No, not at the Olympic Stadium, at the SCG.  No?  OK, FOOTY TRIP TIME!!  Everyone remember to make sure both your girlfriends don't turn up at the same time to pick you up from the airport.

Essendon - Riddled with injury and too inconsisent. No hope. Number 7 Challenger for Collingwood.
Matt's take: As long as Hird has the team playing the way they  should, even making the finals in a strong season is reason to be satisfied.  Jimmy won't omit all his ruckmen, as Knights did two seasons ago, and nor should he as with mobile big men like Paddy Ryder and Tom Belchambers, the Dons look better set up in the middle than at any time since the late '80s when Simon Madden was in his pomp.

Newsflash: Joel Selwood is not perfect. Just very close.

As far as youthful members of the AFL's elite, there are few who compare with Geelong's favourite son, Joel Selwood. Since his debut during that magical 2007 season, he's gone from the anointed "potential captain" to "talisman" to now a probable second to Cameron Ling in the Sleepy Hollow leadership. A popular early-season pick for the Brownlow Medal, his game has grown at nearly the same rate as his physique. From his first matches, he was one of the AFL's better midfielders and in 2008 he represented Victoria in the All-Star State of Origin match, high honours for a kid of 20.

Now his performance takes on more importance in a Cat midfield shorn of their 2007 pace and devoid of any Abletts. He and Jimmy Bartel are the key to the Geelong midfield, the jewels in their hooped crown. But there's a weakness becoming ever more apparent in his armour: Joel Selwood has the yips.

Not in a Josh Kennedy, Cam Mooney or even Rod "Tilt" Carter kind of way - Joel Selwood just can't seem to get the ball on target when shooting for goal. Remove the big white sticks and he's fine, posesssing the pinpoint delivery required for an elite player. But get him inside the forward fifty and his toughness suddenly doesn't cover scoring shots - he's booted 3.7 this year. And unfortunately for him, several of those behinds have been (relatively) easy misses. Never a goalscorer of note - at least, not since before his Bendigo Pioneer days - he has a total of 36 goals over the 101 games of his wonderful career.

This, in itself, isn't the worst thing in the world - there are very few perfect players, or even players without a weakness. Carey's flaws were his dicky shoulders and occasional dose of white-line fever, Ablett Sr was held back by his debatable off-field work ethic and a strange manner of thinking. Brendan Fevola's weakness is obviously the big squishy thing between his ears, Joel Selwood's fatal (only?) flaw is his scoring accuracy. Unlike running mate Bartel, Selwood has a 30-goal-a-season gap in his arsenal. (Ed: You don't know how much it hurts Matt to write this).

Why harp on such a star? Because with their newfound flair for the close result, Joel Selwood's inaccuracy could end up hurting the Cats. Several times throughout the season he's had the chance to convert on the run from 35-40 metres away and failed. Often those shots have been under only mild pressure.

It could be he doesn't slow his momentum enough before setting himself for the kick or even just that he freezes. I'm sure there are myriad other reasons he could be inaccurate that someone more technically-minded could answer, but the Cats' young leader needs to get this right or else his leadership in inaccuracy could cost Geelong a win or two at crucial times.

Teams look to their leaders for guidance. While no-one ever misses a goal on purpose, a good leader has the ability to inspire their teammates through their play, tacitly demanding accountability. While Selwood's play all over the park does this, his shooting for goal does not. The Cats have played six of their eight matches against teams currently in the eight and won by one, two, three, eleven, nineteen and twenty-one points. Each match swung in the balance for some time. One day, probably soon, Joel Selwood - possibly the third or fourth-best midfielder in the league - will step up to shoot for goal with the Cats needing him to score.

When that day comes, Chris Scott hopes he's over his yips.

Image courtesy: en.wikipedia.org

Obituary: Remembering Bobby Davis

Today the tributes flow for Bob Davis, "The Geelong Flyer", as well they should. Davis passed away yesterday at the age of 82. With it, he leaves behind a legacy as Geelong's favourite son.

The reason Bob Davis is so fondly remembered isn't his footballing ability, though he had loads. Neither is it his coaching, which delivered in 1963 Corio Bay's last flag for the twentieth century. It wasn't World of Sport, "Fair Dinkum Unbelievable", League Teams or the Three Wise Monkeys. It was his lifetime love for Geelong Football Club. Bobby was the essence of a one-club man, totally aware of the incredible gift the Cats were to the city of Greater Geelong.

It would be unfair to gloss over his influential play and coaching. As a half-forward flanker, his athleticism was unparalleled and he boasted a devastating long kick. He represented his state with flair and distinction. Any rumours suggesting the Cat teams of those years weren't tough are completely unfounded - no-one won in that era without being hard. He captained, coached - starting at 26 - and won a Best & Fairest award before calling time on a 189-game career. Perhaps the greatest compliment paid to him is that the iconic image of him, in full stream with football tucked under arm, is one of the defining images of that era of Aussie Rules.

There's a pleasing symmetry in that during his coaching period US President John F. Kennedy declared "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country", because that was Bob's attitude to the Kardinia Park faithful. After taking over the reins as Geelong coach, he brought Polly Farmer to Geelong and used Polly's unique skill-set to kickstart a running game which echoed back to Hickey's slick, speedy 1951-52-53 unit; teams in which Bob Davis was a key member.

Bob Davis defined Geelong Football Club for over sixty years. During that time, he was an entertainer both on and off the oval. Alongside Jack Dyer and Lou Richards in League Teams, Davis had access to almost every home in Victoria in a format-defining show which with the modern proliferation of media sources will never again be replicated. His - and his comrades' - impact on football commentary shows should make (Davis protégé) Sam Newman, Eddie McGuire and the Cats' next best born entertainer, Billy Brownless, offer up daily prayers of thanks. There was no laddish behaviour or uncouthness, only three blokes having fun talking about football.

Throughout almost his entire adult life, Bobby was the first source for comment on all matters Geelong: from the brawl with Hawthorn in 1985 to near-bankruptcy in the early 2000s and finally, memorably, awarding Tom Harley the 2009 Premiership Cup and celebrating with "the boys". He was conscious of the blessing the win would be not only to the players, coaches and administrators of Geelong Football Club but also the boon it would prove to the entire region. The city of Geelong, the AFL community and a lot of Victoria will mourn his passing.

Bob Davis, dead at eighty-two. He will be remembered. He will be missed.

Image courtesy: geelongadvertiser.com.au

For The Age's photo gallery honouring Bobby Davis, click here.

Geelong, like Manchester United, are the "Crap Invincibles"

Geelong's unbeaten start to the AFL season has surprised many. Even so, their gritty three-point victory on Friday night perhaps stamped them again as a viable Premiership threat. Pre-season the Cats were daubed old, one-paced and vulnerable not for any lack of skill - they still boast players such as Enright, Corey, Chapman, Scarlett and golden child Joel Selwood - but because they'd lost their best player and their fabled "window" was closing. Rumours of their demise have been greatly overstated. While many expected the Cats to fall from contention this season, they've done quite the opposite.

This is hardly a different viewpoint to some reports emanating from Victoria. The Cats still bear (most of) the fruit of a decade's intelligent drafting and their core, though nearer retirement than debut, may eke out another triumph or two. The Premiership may be a bridge too far, but it is now firmly on the Cats' radar.

This isn't the first time such successful renewal on the fly has happened at the Cattery. In 1995, nearly broken from three Grand Final defeats, Malcolm Blight walked away from coaching Geelong to be replaced by his assistant Gary Ayres. The former Hawthorn defender wanted to toughen a notoriously freewheeling and attack-minded club and got immediate results. The Cats hardened up and were rewarded with another Grand Final appearance that year only to be demolished by an irresistible Carlton unit. They made the finals again in 1997 - with a team many thought much improved over their mid-90s teams - and were eliminated after losing in Adelaide amidst the drama of Leigh Colbert's phantom mark.

These memories have been re-awakened this year. Rookie coach Chris Scott - in his playing days an uncompromising defender like Ayres - has revitalised some aspects of the playing group, most obviously David Wojcinski. He has empowered others, like Taylor Hunt and Daniel Menzel. But more than that, he and the club don't subscribe to 2010 tactics that then-coach Mark Thompson admitted were flawed. The Cats have begun to grind out results as if they've become so accustomed to winning that they have simply just continued this learned behaviour, albeit in a different style.

A parallel can be drawn from the land of tea, Sherlock Holmes, Doctor Who and Pippa Middleton. Manchester United were crowned English Premier Leauge Champions on Saturday, capturing their fourth title in five years. This triumph has been touted rightly as one of Sir Alex Ferguson's greatest achievements: his team - missing Cristiano Ronaldo, Carlos Tevez and (mostly) Wayne Rooney's form - clung onto top position relying on an ageing squad sprinkled with youth.

In 2010, United lost the title to Chelseas and pundits predicted a fall-off. The squad - with only one new player really contributing - went unbeaten into February, the equivalent of the AFL's Round 16. The ESPN Soccernet podcast dubbed Ferguson's mob "The Crap Invincibles" for their ability to avoid defeat yet look totally uninspiring doing it.

Although the AFL's answer to Sir Alex is working in his lab preparing to mastermind an orange outfit into season 2012, it sounds familiar, doesn't it? While the Cats have been impressive so far, the high-scoring juggernaut of 2007 is gone. Like United, Geelong has the enviable gift of being able to win despite their skills not being at their peak. They are the AFL's "Crap Invincibles". This isn't an insult - quite the opposite - their ability to get results such as Friday night's win (against a Magpie outfit they at times looked unable to cope with) is testament to their determination and smarts. They are achieving not because of what they can do physically, but because of strength of character.

Neither club's time-derived ability to win has died. In fact, though their squads are unquestionably weaker than during their pomp of 2007-08, their collective nous has perhaps increased. Injury time has become synonymous with a United rally and goal, while the Cats have made a (slightly annoying but understandable) habit of being able to overpower their opposition with a quarter and a half of devastating play. The popular adage states that success breeds success. It couldn't be more true than in Geelong or Manchester United.

Chris Scott image courtesy: theage.com.au

Sir Alex Ferguson image courtesy: simply-reds.blogspot.com

AFL: The Demise of the Second Team

Perhaps it's just that I'm getting older. It could be that people are more focused as myriad media sources clamour for our time. Maybe it's the sociopolitical economy that drives the AFL. But as I've aged, I hear less and less about that schoolyard phenomenon of the "second team".

I'm not talking about Fremantle, Port Adelaide, the Suns or even the foetal Greater Western Sydney but the schoolyard ritual often carried into adulthood which saw everyone barrack for one team - in my case Geelong - but also support another club in a less obvious way. No scarves or jerseys, just a mental attachment and a more fond disposition to that team after your first love. Fond hopes for success - in good times for your squad or bad - and usually they had the honour of being the second match report you read in The Age or The Sun.

And I know this isn't a phenomenon only I ascribe(d) to: throughout my schoolboy days it was amongst the first questions you asked a potential new friend: "Who'dja barrack for?" - if the answer wasn't your team, you hoped for a more positive response from your follow-up "And who's your second team?".

Growing up in Warrnambool, everyone had a second team - it went with the territory, both literally and figuratively. In Sou'west Victoria, you supported one team - most often Geelong, Fitzroy, Collingwood or Essendon - and had a strong secondary preference for usually the club nearest by location or presence. In our case the closest club was Geelong, just over two hours' drive away, while the young talent from the local Hampden league was "zoned" to Fitzroy, meaning that club had first choice of the available talent.

As an aside, it was also mandatory to have definite preferences as to who you supported in the Hampden League (Warrnambool - definitely not the hated South), it's feeder the WDFL (Russell's Creek) and in the VFA (Werribee). The first two were largely dominated by where you or your Dad played footy and, as always, partisan family values.

As the VFL necessarily begat the AFL and subsequently became the biggest sport in the country, it seems people have left their second team by the wayside. You may well still feel well-disposed to that loveable bunch of rogues (for me, Footscray, err, the Western Bulldogs) but their stranglehold as "second team" is a little more untenable, broached by the Aussie love of the underdog or even recent club changes. You don't care so much when they struggle or when their star is poached by another (new?) club. So what's promoted such a situation?

Predictably, there are many factors which promote a decrease in second teams' importance in our national consciousness. With clubs inspired more and more by the zen by "Six-Sigma", "best process" and "branding", they focus not just on vocal and visible support but the obvious revenue it generates. Ultimately, the league has become a business and as such follows the golden rule of the marketplace: there's little room for sentimentality.

Memberships form such an important part of footy financing, and as memberships aren't cheap, anyone who signs up wants value for money. Any time an Average Joe invests in a club, time formerly taken by a second team is often directed into a closer relationship with your first love. As your stake in one club increases, it perhaps decreases the amount you invest in a second team.

Clubs now position each other to attract the punters' attention, leaving little room for small smiles in the direction of other clubs. The league's business sense - and make no mistake, the league had to evolve in this way - places a high premium on brand loyalty. And for Average Joe and his mate Average Phil, that means you've gotta support the team. Preferably financially as well as emotionally.

As a signed-up Geelong member, I'm bombarded with seemingly daily updates as to what's going on at the Cattery: Jimmy Bartel lays into Harry Taylor, Neil Balme's opinions on issue X, Y or Z and even Mathew Stokes' memory for sporting trivia. The Cats want me as closely as possible in touch with club news and events and many members want that proximity. With such contact, they can colour my perception of my team: I can feel like I know "The Boys" or that the club cares about me. I don't doubt they do - just that like any relationship they'd like something from me as well.

With the banalities that often make up much of their emails, the Cats offer an "inside the dressing room" look at Kardinia Park, a chance to learn intimate knowledge of club operations and promote involvement in local events. Mostly, this is stuff you wouldn't know about another club. The Cats are staking out their territory: with emails, with online web chats and if they're not podcasting they're missing a fast-departing train.

Clubs want your full attention and I'd hazard a bet that many would probably prefer their fans don't have a definite second team. And this is fine. In a crowded entertainment marketplace where sport, fine art and plenty other methods of happy distraction vie for your custom, clubs are simply leveraging the tools at their disposal to ensure their competition. It comes though, at the expense of the second team: in order to promote themselves, clubs must suggest tacitly that their opposition is inferior (in excitement, potential, results, history, whatever), no matter how their on- or off-field merits.

The olden days - when Gary Ablett was a half-forward flanker - are gone and it's mostly for the benefit. The game is in much better shape in nearly every way, no matter how rosy the glasses are that you use to look back on those halcyon days. But subtly it's come to an almost biblical invitation - if you're not with us, you're against us. We can't blame anyone for it - there's really no need, either. It's just a strange change in the way we view our sport. Clubs need to continue to reinforce their brand, otherwise they may find themselves facing the fiscal situation of a Fitzroy or latterly, Port Adelaide and North Melbourne.

Images courtesy: http://mycardsscray.blogspot.com/2007_05_01_archive.html

"Bomber" Thompson's strange rhetoric

Mark Thompson is unrepentant as to the manner in which he left Geelong in October. No surprises there. In fact, in today's Age he actually came off sounding as if he was the one who was wronged in the messy marriage-breakup that was his exit from the Cattery.

His quotes in that newspaper are telling as words like "I can look myself in the mirror and just say I'm happy with everything that I've done" and "I gave anything I could possibly give. I walked away from a very lucrative contract" give an insight into his mindset: mildly hurt and surprised by the furore his decision has generated. But what he fails to realise is that by defending himself in this manner, he can only further infuriate the Cats supporters who saw his last season derailed by the constant circus surrounding Gary Ablett's possible move to the Gold Coast. Ablett eventually walked and so did Thompson. It's probable the Geelong faithful will wish the Brownlow Medallist more good favour than their former coach. It's also likely that Li'l Gary's departure will be seen as a much lesser act of disloyalty.

Because make no bones about it, Thompson tried to curry favour with both board and public in order to rid himself of his obligation to Geelong and re-join his former club Essendon. By claiming burn out, he didn't lie but withheld portions of the truth so as to reflect more sympathetically. He's re-stated his lack of desire to continue as a senior coach and thus feels justified, but by claiming ill-health - which is what burn-out equates to - only to re-surface a mere month later at another club makes him look economical with the truth.

There's little doubt that "Bomber" was burnt out. Indeed, in his interview yesterday he looked very well, rested and much healthier than he did during almost all of his stint at Kardinia Park. This can only back up his side of the story but from the outside it looks very much as if Thompson's head was turned toward Bomberland by all that he sought: less stress, re-uniting with a former club and a new challenge. When he realised the grass was greener back in Melbourne, it was down to him to engineer an excuse for leaving.

It's often said that some coaches are re-building masters and others don't have the stomach for that aspect of the job. Thompson had been the coach at Geelong for a decade and the reconstruction of that Cats side from afterthought to Premiers took the best part of those ten years by which time he was facing another remodelling. The fact that many of his best players are approaching retirement meant a bevy of personnel decisions and probable rebuilding from scratch. To be blunt, he just wasn't up for it.

Perhaps ten years of intense scrutiny in the fishbowl of Corio Bay took it's toll. Most tellingly of all, Thompson yesterday said "Being a senior coach, you just get criticised very heavily a lot of the times in your life and you almost become immune to it and that’s where I’m at" before continuing to say "I don’t have a problem with Geelong at all. If they have (with me) it's their problem. I gave anything I could possibly give. I walked away from a very lucrative contract ...".

Therein lies the problem: Thompson feels no remorse because he's been pilloried so heavily over the years that his response is one of a learned behaviour: go with his instincts and stick to any decision he makes. The criticism has given him such a thick skin that even he struggles to see through it. Thompson is happy with everything that he's done only because he's been desensitised by the scrutiny he's endured, even to the point of refusing to examine his decision-making process.

Were he to look at his departure objectively then perhaps he would think he owed Geelong hierarchy the complete truth. Of course that's unlikely.

Also irksome is his statement about "giving anything possible". Actually, it's complete rubbish. By resigning, Thompson broke his contract and as such forfeited any monies due to him. This doesn't constitute not giving up anything, only not receiving money for work which he did not complete. Giving implies he bought his way out of his contract, something which patently did not occur.

It was perhaps the most poorly kept secret in AFL football that "Bomber" would eventually take the senior assistant role at Essendon. New coach James Hird wanted him and he wanted to come. However he didn't escape the Cattery with his dignity intact. By telling half-truths to his comrades fearing the whole story would make him look bad, he has just made himself look worse. It's too bad that this ill-judgement means he will not just be remembered for two premierships and the fantastic play the Cats have delivered over the past decade. He will now, like Norm Smith, always be remembered for the way he left.

An Open letter to Gary Ablett Jr.

An Open letter to Gary Ablett Jr.

Dear Gary,

As your impending decision approaches, I would like to offer a different perspective: that of a Geelong fan living in North America. I'd also like to draw some parallels between your situation and that of a hoops star of a different breed, LeBron James, the basketballer who recently found himself in similar circumstances.

I'm sure you know of LeBron: he's arguably the best player on the planet, the runaway winner of the past two NBA MVP awards. His team, the Cleveland Cavaliers, have steamrolled through the league for the last three seasons much as the Cats have done in the AFL. Unfortunately for him tough, they've not experienced the same finals success as Geelong. Over the past year much of the media publicity surrounding the NBA has not come as a result of his or his team's performance, but because at season's end, James's contract expired and he became a free agent along with several of the best players in the league.

After an unprecedented media frenzy, LeBron's “people” scheduled a nationwide hourlong special on ESPN last Thursday where he would announce his decision. After much speculation, LeBron did as the pundits expected and chose he felt were better opportunities for the future – one with better weather - the Miami Heat. And he did it for the same money that Cleveland was offering.

I can't help but see some similarities in your respective future career choices.

As a Geelong fan, I'm obviously on tenterhooks awaiting where you'll play next year. To be honest, I couldn't fault you for going to the Gold Coast – especially for the money reportedly on offer. I can't even fault LeBron for his choice. But what I ask is that if you choose the Gold rather than Surf Coast, you don't insult your fans, your hometown, and teammates like LeBron James.

I'm not talking about choosing another city in which to continue your career. But by making his fans, teammates and club the last to know, popular opinion has swung against James so strongly that everyone now regards his ESPN special as misguided, at the very best; most agree that it was perhaps the most self-centred thing that a “team-oriented” athlete could do; some even posit that the TV special has tarnished his legacy

Most people in North America knew that LeBron was sorely tempted by Miami and it was probable he would depart Cleveland. His camp misjudged the situation however, and the hour-long special came off as self-promotion rather than explanation. The best comparison I can make was that inviting your partner onto “Jerry Springer” only to tell them you were having a baby with their sister. Sure Cleveland was upset that he'd been “unfaithful” – but the manner the news was delivered made the city want nothing to do with him ever again except boo.

If you leave, Gary, fair enough – you're completely entitled to look after yourself and your future. But if the decision is GC17, please don't tell us why. We don't have many articulate athletes and those that are get shackled by team rules and the expectation that all any player will say is “Man-Talk”: the same hackneyed cliches. We cry out for articulateness. We scream for someone who will publicly say more than “We're taking things one week at a time” or “We're excited about the prospect of playing Team X, Y or Z next week”. But this is different. This is a situation where ONLY hackneyed cliches will work.

You see, it will be seen by Geelong as a breakup. Some breakups are predestined because the parties were unsuited at the start. Other times, both parties realise it's time to go in their own directions. After two (hopefully three) premierships, a hatful of awards and recognition as one of the great teams of the modern era, perhaps you feel it's time to strike out separately.

Delivering the break-up speech, it's impossible for the “breaker” to look good by the words you choose, but you can come out looking much, much worse. After “I've decided we shouldn't see each other any more”, the “breakee” often doesn't take in a lot more due to shock. And we are, as a public, similar. Please don't let the media circus that this situation will undoubtedly generate go to your head and allow you think your motives are important to us now. In time, these factors will become completely apparent and we'll make our peace with them.

If you choose the Gold Coast it won't be a betrayal, nor should it be seen as one. But if a decision is compounded by a lack of class as LeBron's was, it seems like betrayal. We can forgive an affront, but following a breakup with an insult creates different wounds that rarely heal completely.

Choose well, Gary. We have enjoyed you for eight years, and I hope you finish your career in Geelong. The level of public interest and media coverage surrounding your decision is unprecedented in Australia. But please learn from an older, more experienced and more cynical market as you look at all your options.

Sincerely,

Matthew Wood
www.balancedsports.blogspot.com

Past, present and future crimes

Now this post should be monitored carefully, since I am an unabashed Geelong fan. But since the name of the blog is "Balanced Sports", let's do our best.

No ifs or buts, Steven Baker is a highly effective tagger: he does jobs consistently on players who have been gifted with more natural footy-finding-and-using ability than him. The conundrum with Baker - as with many taggers – is that he often finds it difficult to stop himself from stepping over the line which separates what is legal from what is not. The frequency with which Baker cross this line means he's no longer just a stopper. He is also a thug. So how much did Baker's rep have to do with his current 9-game suspension?

The AFL has tried to rid itself of behind-the-play violence for as long as I can remember. The first concrete steps came in the mid-eighties in two separate but related measures: the admission that the then-VFL couldn't keep its own house in order with Victoria Police charging Leigh Matthews for assault after he broke Neville Bruns' jaw in 1985; and subsequently the introduction of video review in 1987. As a result, behind the scenes violence has dramatically decreased and the AFL has become a much more family-friendly league.

Since that time, Australian football has evolved. Now no longer does a match involve 18 separate one-on-one contacts on the field but where given the importance of team performance, player roles have contracted to fulfilling their own individual tasks within a framework of the team as a whole. Midfielders are now either offensive, or defensive. Players who are charged with stopping an opponent are liable to do many things to irritate and niggle their prey. Times were that your team enforcer might be able to “deal with” these pests themselves, but as the AFL has put paid to that, they have legislated also to protect the ball-playing protagonist rather than the stopper.

But there are two separate issues here and Baker rides the crux of them. As a stopper, he and many others have frequently stepped outside the law to beat his man: holding, pinching, jumper-punching, subtle kneeing are all familiar sights to the AFL fan. The other side of the coin is that with his 2007 conviction for “king-hitting” Jeff Farmer, Baker has form for completely disregarding the laws of the game and acting in a manner which on the streets would earn him a criminal record. There are fair taggers, and foul. There are also fair players, and foul. Though his footy tactics are arguably no worse than his tagging compatriots, his prior tribunal history has stamped Baker a violent player and this undoubtedly played on the minds and notepads of the Match Review Panel in grading his offences.

The grading of the offences is a curious point however, and whether the contact was negligent, intentional, reckless, slightly overzealous, a little bit naughty or directly as a result of alien control is beyond the ability of a mere mortal to calculate without generating unwelcome conjecture. The AFL's grading systems was designed to remove subjectivity from the tribunal process; unfortunately all it has done is shove those opinions to one side of the process. The opinions are then still used.

Baker deserved to be sanctioned for the punches delivered – they were captured on video and guilt was indisputable. What was also indisputable was his 155 carryover points, adding two weeks to his time on the sidelines. He is a player who polarises opposition supporters and even those of St. Kilda – the epitome of a player no-one likes but is undeniably effective.

More interesting is the charge that Baker knowingly made forcible contact with the injured hand of his opponent Steve Johnson. It would be naive to suggest Baker didn't know it was injured: whether it is an actionable offence is more the discussion. Given the furore when St. Kilda captain Nick Riewoldt had his injured shoulder bumped off-the-ball by Brisbane's Mal Michael & Chris Scott, Baker would surely know the implications of such a petty and ungentlemanly act. Given that subjectivity still plays a role in the tribunal proceedings, it's unsurprising that the Match Review Panel essentially came up with a new charge with which to sanction Stevie B; it's also completely understandable that when presented with three cases and then an allegedly-separate fourth case, rationality finds differentiation difficult.

It may be that Steven Baker's past sins amounted to more than just 155 extra demerit points. But his conduct is to blame, not the MRP. Courts of law take into account recidivism – the AFL Tribunal should be no different.