Tourist Town

I am hanging for the summer. Ah, the beach. Ah, less clothes. What? These things go together? Tourist Town puts up its heels for the tourists. This place is like anywhere else in the city during winter. Just colder.

Have you seen the smiles per hour signs? A volunteer supposedly counts the amount of smiles that pass them in the street. My local is one smile per hour. That does not surprise me. Some weeks ago, a reasonably attractive girl approached me and stood in my way. I tried to move around her but she blocked me. I stopped her spiel as it was obvious she was selling something. I said, “Nobody talks to you around here unless they want cigarettes or money. You had better work on your approach.” She replied like a five year old, “I would offer cigarettes to anybody who asked.” Subtext – ‘Yes I am selling something. You should stop and listen to me.’ At that moment, a passing chap of about 25 stopped and chimed in, “Oh OK. I’ll have a cigarette then.” He was quite a prankster. I used that moment to duck away from my unwelcome assailant. I turned around after a few paces. He got his cigarette and left with a smile. We had made a complete fool of her.

I liken the street situation to being on a crowded train. Any eye contact is unwanted and every effort shall be made to avoid it. However, this is a winter story my friends. In summer, I am happy to say “Nah” in a loud voice at ten paces. I keep walking, happy in my avoidance. I like to read how far off in the distance people are sizing others up. It’s fun to dismantle their approach at the beginning. It heightens my mood. It is a moving mosaic. In winter, as a generalisation, I do not want to be forced into unwanted contact. It bugs me. The eyes are creepy, and waiting longer. I hate it. It could simply be that there are less people. It could be that there are more, and I hate to say it, locals. I accept that we will see more ‘partially moneyed’ tourists, paying to get over here. That does not diminish my point.

Tourists, as another generalisation, want to ask directions. Actually make small talk for non-material purposes. They smile more. This brings me to my second point, ppl - the tourist girls. To continue my generalisation, these girls do not judge by the company one keeps. I must have heard at least five times, “You are so brave/cool for being out by yourself. Back home in (insert European country or city here) I would never go out alone.” I have never once heard this or a related comment from a local girl. I would expect only dismissive silence. I question whether this attitude is counterproductive. Sure, it weeds out the creeps with no friends. Even the concept of a creep with no friends I find to be ridiculous. He would have to be the most socially malnourished person of all time. I’m actually quite tired of having to organise drinks with boys with the express purpose of ditching them after a few hours. It’s a stupid hoop that I think we are forced through. I know a few girls who are tired of their girlfriends doing it to them also. Who wins?

The two strands of summer and tourist girls now collide. In summer the tourists flock to the fair beachside havens. Last summer, I made a conscious decision to avoid local girls (whom I hadn’t met) – except at parties when there was a mutual friend, ‘social proofing’. It was my best summer. What is wrong with this picture? Probably nothing, it’s nature. I haven’t done much travelling. Some mates rave on and on about the overseas girls. They are talking a language I now understand. The differences are the assumptions made by the girls. A male tourist is an assumed open book. A stranger from nearby has less to offer. I now laugh and say you can save by going to Tourist Town. The tourists have come to you.

Written 18th Sept 2009

Ireland for Test Cricket

Are there good reasons to admit Ireland to Test status? Heck, are there good reasons not to? Each major tournament, the Irish provide us with upsets or close finishes. Ireland has a long history of playing cricket. They are currently ranked 9th for T20 and 11th for ODIs (pre-World Cup). Given time & minimal assistance, the Irish can be a competitive Test outfit too.

Zimbabwe and Bangladesh were ushered into the Test cricket ranks with a minimum of administrative fuss. Bangladesh due to the huge popularity of the game in the country. Zimbabwe partly as an ally for South Africa. There was concern at the time. This mainly stemmed from the idea of each Test nation playing each other twice in a rotating schedule - home & away. This has largely been done away with. They are both considered minnows in the ranks, and that is fine. The same can apply to Ireland, for now.

There is no need to tour Ireland in a 'proper' series. A single Test match in Dublin prior to the Ashes is a winner. A proper warm-up. Considerations of strictly fielding the full Australian XI can be pushed to one side. Test rankings can easily be re-jigged to reflect the minnow status - leaving the prospect of a rained out draw or an unthinkable(!?) loss as acceptable. A doctored pitch would make for entertaining viewing and could be encouraged.

Admitting Ireland to the Test ranks leads on to benefits for Bangladesh & Zimbabwe. Playing Ireland. For Australia, the reason for not staging a single Test match in Dhaka/Harare as part of a continental tour is purely old-fashioned. Statistics, 'purity' of the game & stodginess. There should be no requirement for any of the three to tour Australia in return.

Ireland suffers through no ICC recognized first-class system. Not to mention the colonials over the Irish Sea pilfering their best players. A stroke of the pen can fix this. Nothing is lost to cricket by doing so.

Originally published in Sports Report

T20 - Club versus Country

There is something inherently weird about Twenty20 internationals. It's not a format that lends itself to being the 'pinnacle' of competition. This is not a bashing of T20. It is very watchable. Fast, easy to understand and constant action.

So many other T20 competitions exist around the world. It works best in the club environment. A number 5 or 6 club batsmen will get opportunities to bat & bowl. Due to league scheduling - many games, many different pitch conditions. A good club team will have plenty of able bowlers. It's a bit of a joke to be selected at 5 or 6 for most internationals. The best they can hope for is a top order collapse to bring them in before the final few overs.

The T20 World Cup should be the exception. Even this opportunity has been muffed. Not enough games are played (which is doubly important due to the more random nature of one-off games). Not enough teams/countries are allowed to enter. This is puzzling as T20 is far and away the best product to spread the game to non-cricket nations. It is less confusing to a new viewer than any other type of cricket. It has the money to attract. Little known Canadians or Afghans could have their shot at international stardom and a neat bankroll from touring the various domestic leagues. Until this is fixed, international T20 will be second best.

Following the money, IPL is the peak. India (BCCI) owns 50% of the Champion's League. The CLT20 has many problems, but the solutions are fairly simple for a non-vested interest. The remainder of ownership is split between South Africa & Australia. It is easy to see the issues that arise. India demanding too many teams to enter (4 out of 12!). Hogging of the hosting rights - it has only been held in India & South Africa. Australian time zones are deemed TV-unfriendly. All other nations are marginalized from CLT20. At present, the West Indies is the only other nation guaranteed a spot. Champion's League, when it gets its act in order, will be a much greater product. Cricket fans are all too familiar with the dreary politics that accompany the game.

Looking at the problems of CLT20 vs the T20 World Cup - the World Cup is much easier to repair. International T20s, in the immediate lead-up to a World Cup, would be more compelling viewing. India & Pakistan went from indifference to obsession after winning their respective T20 Cups.

The job of internationals is to spread the game. Hell, when Australia tours England - pitstops to Ireland, Scotland & the Netherlands should be mandatory. The money, and quality, will remain with club T20.

Gil's To Do List (The Chosen One)

Welcome to the cosy world of AFL politics. Where various parasites & hangers-on compete for relevance. Enter Gil McLachlan, the anointed son of this grubby world. More important than Gary Ablett or Buddy Franklin? You be the judge.

What is a lad/lass to do to stand out amongst the muck? Do something. It's pretty simple, but these corporate types often have little grasp. Copping a hefty pay packet for sitting around a table, tossing in occasional opinion seems pretty wacked out. Gotta envy those private boxes with the fancy meat pies though. No queues for the dunny either.

The Chosen One has a few things to do. Credit must be given for publicly addressing the first issues already. The appearance of action is damn important. At least he can blame hold-ups on the fat guys around the table if need be. Nothing better than ruffling a few feathers on the first day of work.

1) Buy Docklands Stadium

The creation of Docklands Stadium was always a crunching stomp on suburban football. Waverley & Princes Park shown the door. Yeah, yeah. Progress is fine. Not with the ridiculous contract blockers the miserly Ian Collins helped put in place. The 'quality of stadium' clause was a great way to churn some cash out of the AFL clubs. Big ups for pocket-lining, thumbs down for the AFL.

The Chosen One, being a man of this obscure world, sees the negotiations over Docklands in dollar terms. If the AFL must pay too high a price - he has stated it would be better giving the cash directly to the tenant clubs. True that.

What is the right price? It's worth buying Docklands now at a price above the right one. How far above? A little bit. For the AFL's brand power, appearing decisive and a friend of the clubs is vital.

2) Variable Ticketing

On paper it does appear a good plan. Would have sailed through the boardroom with barely a ripple. The problem is when it comes across as a wallet scrape at big games. It's too hard to work against that impression, because it's spot on. There are going to be angry punters, particularly when some pay extra and others don't.

Where variable ticketing should be highlighted is at the smaller games. Melbourne vs GWS at the MCG for $5 - I'm in. The Chosen One needs to give back more. Let the clubs have a greater role in pricing. That avoids the central role the AFL often poorly plays.

3) Good Friday

What a nothing issue. A boring day with no football. Put a game on. Let it be North vs Bulldogs. Debate over.

4) Go Long Term

This one needs a heck of alot of patience. The AFL is 18 teams, 10 from Victoria.

Sydney needs to play GWS twice. Adelaide needs to play Port twice etc. There are known, and accepted, bumps that will never be smoothed as things stand. For crowds & cash, Collingwood needs to play more games in Melbourne.

Kick a team from Victoria. Or plan for two new teams. Do it within 10 years. It's messy either way. If the rewards are pitched far higher than what North recently refused - it's possible to do without hatcheting another club like with Fitzroy.

Fixtures and possible divisions can all be sorted later.

The other issue is equalization. A necessary evil. Just don't overdo it. The big clubs will pay. Be careful not to push them into 'creative accounting'.

The ball is in your hands, Chosen One.

Farewell Vlad Demetriou. What Have You Done?

The benevolent dictator has announced his retirement. Andrew 'Vlad' Demetriou has presided over much financial success in his long AFL reign. Crowd numbers, TV deals & expansion teams are but a few of the ticks on his report card. Not much interesting to reflect on there. So, to the entertaining part : What has Vlad royally stuffed up?

Demetriou is, and always has been, a terrible media performer. The man is too cautious, not wanting to set a foot wrong. Or say the wrong thing. This in itself has led to many problems. Being highly intelligent is not a virtue when the feed from brain to mouth is so heavily watered down. David Warner with a stutter could easily outperform Vlad in these stakes.

Sydney Swans :

In 2005, Vlad described the Swans as playing an unattractive, ugly style of football. That wouldn't win many matches. Needless to say, they went on to win the premiership. Sure, many people agreed with the assessment on playing style. This was an example where he should have butted out. The statement appeared to be an attempt to break out of his shackled media personality. It failed miserably. As he also stated, it is not the job of the AFL to influence playing style. Sydney is a key market, and the AFL will always be hoping for success in crowds & ladder position. Jawboning the only team in town was a move from amateur hour. He learnt from it, and became more cloistered in commentary than ever before.

Melbourne :

The shining beacon of bungling. Dean Bailey held a press conference in 2011. Admitting, in plain speak, that as coach he had tanked. There was no doubt, no window dressing. Many football fans were relieved that the genie had been let out of the bottle. It was an obvious, understandable practice. Why on earth should fans hope to win a few meaningless games at the end of a season? They are not dumb, and are well aware of the twisted, daft rules in relation to draft picks.

Enter Vlad. Tanking does not exist, has never happened. There is no reason for it to happen. Sigh. Yes, we get that it is your job to maintain that the rules in place are sensible. Reasonable and tamper-proof. That is all he did. An ostrich with its head in the sand. Shambolic. The AFL investigation concluded that there was no tanking, but managed to mete out some dubious fines.

Essendon :

The handling of the whole saga had me crawling into an AFL-free zone. Many unresolved questions. Much pre-empting of penalties by our Dear Vlad. Speaking to the media in a forceful manner, then meekly hiding behind 'we will let ASADA conclude their investigation' was pathetic. The investigation could never be impartial. Besides, it was obvious to all & sundry that conclusive proof was a mirage on the horizon. How could an injecting program that relied on falsifying or destroying documents ever be reduced to black & white? We will probably never know until the retirements of some players what did actually take place.

The element that I do have sympathy for Demetriou is in wanting to be tough. When he made his statements regarding Essendon, the catch-all rule of bringing the game into disrepute should have been enacted. Then & there. To let the issue drag until near September was a disgrace. Should never have happened. Overshadowing a season of AFL with anything other than football is wrong. Hindsight is easy ; the same penalties that were delivered - brought forward by six months.

Rules of the Game :

Least relevant in terms of Vlad's influence. As it happened during his time at the top, the mud sticks however. The constant re-jigging of on-field rules was too much to handle. Knowing that player safety was the driving reason behind many of the changed rules does allow some leeway. It will always be a difficult balancing act. Head high tackles, for one, is an obvious example. When the rules are changed too greatly, to reward dangerous behaviour, it is a backwards step. Pushing in the back is far less clear. Jeff Gieschen and his woeful comedy routine is a demonstration of this.

Change the rules less frequently. The AFL should be aiming for an endpoint, but not try to get there overnight. There are too many subtle problems that need a slow approach.

Andrew 'Vlad' Demetriou had a positive tenure in his time as chief boot kicker in the AFL. The game is in very good shape. It is always more fun to pick apart the bad elements. Perhaps this is reasonable. Running the AFL requires a back seat mentality. The need to be a driver is minimal, the impetus of footy will do most of the work.

( Originally published in Sports Report )

Winter Olympics: The Ugly Sister?

Can the Winter Games be described as the undesirable half of the Olympic family? In many ways, the answer is yes. Weird & wacky events that never rate a mention outside the Olympic schedule. Being played on snow or ice rules out the sports from many countries. Or, relegates them to the preserve of the well-to-do. Scratch the surface and there is much to like about the Winter Games.

The most important part of any Olympics is to elevate niche events into prime-time. This certainly happens in both Summer & Winter versions. The difference is that the Summer Olympics have become too dependent on mainstream sports. Golf & Tennis anyone? What a cop out. Two sports that have no place in the Olympic circle. They are well established and have their own annual calendar of major championships. A blatant dash for cash and ratings. Throw in Football (Soccer) and the contempt is clear. FIFA themselves give little credence to it. It is a glorified under-23 event. They'll happily take the money and run too.

Compare the headline offerings from the frigid games: Ice Hockey & Figure Skating. Ice Hockey, like Basketball (and to a lesser extent Baseball), is a mainstream sport. However, it is not properly unified. USA & Canada still have the gall to declare their domestic event the World Championship. A global lineup works at the Olympics. It pits the best athletes against each other - and significantly - the competitors care. Cannot say the same for Tennis, Golf or Football. Ice Hockey is a worthy vehicle for the Winter Games.

Figure Skating. Drill down and it most resembles the dullard Rhythmic Gymnastics. It has huge appeal though. Torvill & Dean saw to that in 1984. Incredibly boring the moment we are informed the last jump has taken place. Talk about anti-climax. The remainder is an invariable artistic flourish of arms and legs. With simulated hugs & kisses. Yuck. Figure Skating is best described as a 16-year old prancing around. Twisted to resemble a nationalistic pursuit/endeavour. Listening to the commentators tweak the line of good taste in admiration. Where jock-time correlates to the judge's score. Plainly weird. In the Olympic tradition of cashing in (or perhaps cashing out) - the team event has been added to this year's lineup.

The big events are the Olympic gravy. The little events are the meat. A cursory glance will reveal which cuts are to be prodded to the side of the plate. The others to be devoured with glee.

Ski Jump. Wow. A terrifying combination of the existential & mundane. A guy (Women's Ski Jump is new this year) skiing down a ramp and jumping. Yeah, it's pretty simple. The excitement is in the effort to produce the extra metre. The athleticism to hold aerodynamic shape through the air. Two different ramps allow the viewer's digestive system to not go into overdrive cramming it in.

Biathlon. Ummm. A seeming nod to infantry invasion during the European Winter. Ski then shoot. Ski then shoot. Would be better served by painting a bear or wolf onto the shooting targets. The parson's nose - has its place but not palatable. Insert toothpicks under eyelids for the mesmerizing new team event.

Snowboard events. Halfpipe is easily the pick. Genuine action, if only too short due to the run-length. The scoring system should be tweaked to allow an aggregate. A bit of a downer seeing a pearler of a run. Then the athlete knowing they don't need to outdo it as they see others crash & burn. Hey, we're Aussie. We need a contrived final to help us feel the thrill.
Slopestyle -  New. Could have been good if we weren't treated to the fascinations of looking at the commentary desk while they mutter irrelevancies on our local medal chances. Show us the damn visuals and deliver the caustic chatter over it.
Cross - Worth watching, though the inevitable comparisons to Steven Bradbury will never fade. Fails to garner much interest due to the sheer randomness of the victor.
Parallel Slalom - Gimmicky. Not long enough to be a true test of skill. Enjoyable nonetheless.

(edit - Ski Slopestyle was amazing. A must watch event for future games)

Curling. I hear you say 'Lawn bowls on ice?' Yes, that's what it is. A terrible concept that somehow comes alive. Can always count on a Scandinavian to be practicing the ancient martial art of screamido. Yelling, or more accurately, constipating at the rock long after it has left their hand. Beats a magic show hands down. The sheer wackiness of post-delivery hijinks. If evidence for paranormal activity is your thing, look no further. 'Hurry hard' takes on a whole new meaning.

Bobsled track. Consistently good fare. The precision used to power the sled and jump in is phenomenal. And that's just the first few seconds. Pity the poor sod who has to park his arse in the air at the back of the sled during the run.
Luge - As flavoursome as the bobsled.
Skeleton - Downright weird. Luging head first. Not a career choice that brings a steady form of remuneration or longevity. Next event to be added will likely be strapping a dog to the athletes. Point deductions if the tail is no longer wagging. Or connected. Or alive.

There it is. A cursory glance at some of the events. The proof is in the pudding. A banquet of hotchpotch events that does more to promote the small end of town. The Olympic ideal.

The Winter Olympics offers more in the strange axis than does the skimpily attired Summer Olympics. She may be less attractive at first, but as your mother told you - It's what is inside that counts.

(Originally published on Sports Report)

The Pigeons

Pigeons. The very word fills me with dread. It wasn’t always like this. Avian scum. Rats of the sky. Flying trashcans. Show ‘em a little bit of hospitality and they will stay forever. Apparently like a Queenslander.


When I first moved in, I made a discovery. Two scrawny, ugly pigeon chicks lived on my balcony - in an excrement coated bucket. It was 30cm or so deep with shit. I guess this is a bird’s life. They would sit there in silence until they heard a flap of wings. Up they’d get, chirp, chirp. One of the chicks was taller and stronger. He would always be fed first. It is amazing to see survival of the fittest in such a small environment. It took them months to grow up. Months too long. The balcony was cleaned just before I moved in. After 3 months it looked worse. I reckon it hadn’t been cleaned for two years before me. The parents got used to me, and realised I would not chase them away if they were feeding. That was my mistake. I’m on the sheltered side of the beach, ideal breeding territory.

The eldest chick was first out of the nest. He used the opportunity to walk around, he didn’t bother trying to use his wings. When I’d try to chase him off the balcony, he’d flee back to the nest. I’d leave him there. When I finally chased him away, he was well oversized. He'd had an ideal nest, with walking space. That will almost never happen in the wild. They have to fly immediately to leave their nest, or drop to the ground. The little one left a day or two later. I removed the filthy bucket, tossed it in the trash, and hoped that was the end of it.

If I were a newspaper writer, I would take this opportunity to point out the cultural differences between myself and the pigeons. I would state that one must not judge. One should accept relative differences in life. But this would be bullshit. They exist only to crap on my balcony! This
family of pigeons and I are now at war.

Spring is here again. The pigeons – now three, mother, father and strong son – roost but 10 metres away. Last season I managed to keep them away, somehow. They have regathered their efforts. I’d bet they did not breed last Spring, and are desperate this time around. They roost on an open roof. They cannot lay eggs there. I see their beady eyes scoping this prime real estate, my balcony. The mother is looking for a nest. The son appears to be following to ‘see what to do’. The father is clearly on guard duty. When she lands, she goes under chairs, into pot plants, wherever. I have picked her up 3 or 4 times and ejected her. She was too nestled in to make a quick getaway. And of course, all 3 of them crap everywhere.

The pigeons rule my local shopping street. Most people can’t be bothered putting their food in the bin. They feed and feed. They are so tame that the older pigeons are willing to fly onto your table while eating. It may take 5 shoos before they bloody get the message. Some old men feed them daily. In a way, the pigeons offer them a greater social outlet than humans. When I am in a different city, I like nothing more than feeding the birds. It’s a weird (anti-social in a sense) behaviour.

Yesterday I filled a small cup with turpentine. I soaked bread in it overnight, and left it for the pigeons. They haven’t eaten it. They haven’t been back for two days – no new shit. Will they finally leave me alone? Must I kill them to get my peace?

AFL Tanking Debate

The snooze button came off when sacked Melbourne coach, Dean Bailey, held a press conference on Monday.

"I had no hesitation at all in the first two years of ensuring this club was well placed for draft picks," Bailey said.

"I was asked to do the best thing by the Melbourne Football Club, and I did it."

To the majority of AFL fans, this came as a sensible comment. An admission of a commonplace practice - tanking. Finally, talk from a coach untarnished by AFL-realpolitik.


An assistant coach, Tony Liberatore, had previously spoken of his clear belief that Carlton tanked in 2007. This was duly downplayed & denied - rehashed as bitterness at leaving the club the year after. Snooze button on.

The VFL draft came into full force in 1986. A toned down version was present from 1981. The contentious priority pick rule was introduced in 1993.

I vividly recall barracking against Hawthorn in 2004 (4 wins) & 2005 (5 wins). It was an empty feeling being at the MCG. Numbing. 2005 was exceptionally pointless. One less win would have offered the daft priority pick.


If incentive is to be accepted as the major motivation in many fields - it behooves the denier to enter into dreary semantics in order to side-track the conversation. There is no other recourse. This would be a fair summation of the official debate to this point.


It has taken 30 years to overcome stubborn, head in the sand denial. 25 years if one wishes to be finicky, in a reprisal of said behaviour. This may be an optimistic statement in itself. An AFL 'investigation' has 'uncovered' that players were utilised "out of their position as part of their development" and "they allowed senior players to leave the club and get draft picks in return". This is a pathetic re-mapping of Dean Bailey's comments. To expect more would be folly. 


The reasons for the AFL body refusing to acknowledge such an obvious reality are clear. The sports betting market. Protecting their ar$es, and the money made from the percentage of funds they legally skim from every bet made.

The Solution :


Firstly, get rid of the priority pick altogether. It is moronic for the AFL not to concede this point. It was ill-thought and has well outlived any usefulness it may have offered.


This should be done in 2 or 3 years time. Announced at this season's end.


Second, a draft lottery is only a partial solution. In an intentionally compromised system, it is a reasonable step. Unlike the NBA, do not offer the lowest finisher a greater chance of pick #1. Offer the bottom 4 or 6 an equal chance ie 25% or 17%


This will fix most of the problems. Tanking would still exist when a team was concerned about finishing fifth or seventh last.


Third, remove all betting on teams that are in tank contests. This should be forced on the AFL. Suddenly, they would then jump to fix the problem. (Haha, again incentive being the main motivator)


Lastly - do not place the blame at the feet of clubs/club administrators/club coaches. Accept that stupid rules produce stupid outcomes.

Aug 13 2011


Andrew Demetriou again denies the existence of tanking. Proposes life bans. What an absolute joke. This guy is made to look a fool on certain issues. Here's a very simple idea : Stop treating the fans of AFL as idiots. That would go a long way..... sigh

Chris Judd on the Football Media

Ben Cousins - In the Beginning

This Is Not Consent (Woman beds 200 AFL players)

The Royal Wedding - What it says about us

The Royal Wedding is upon us. Admittedly, a 'nice' event - the public union of two charismatic people, Prince William & Kate Middleton. Bigger than the wedding itself, is what the wedding signifies.

The clamour of attention the wedding is receiving is massive. We have seen umpteen reports in London of the lead-up. Hilariously, regular news is being reported from over there. Much like a fake background that often lies behind weather reporters. All in all, the stampede is a desired one. Eclipsing all other events. It is feeding the public taste for miniscule information regarding the wedding. A bit sad, really.

Suggestions have been made that the fascination is equal to a 'big-time' celebrity. Compare the response to the 'Coming of Oprah' to Australian shores. It is hard to disagree. Either way, it does make the country look second-rate. Indeed, the US appears equally fixated.

A republic. Seems further away in Australia than ever, indeed in Britain also. This is a glorious distraction that panders to the romantic tastes of many. Papering over the obvious problem of having an outmoded head of state.

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it". A difficult line to argue against as a dismissal of the republican idea. The Queen 

has little influence, if any, on contemporary politics. It is indeed the symbolism that many have problems with.

The succession of the throne. Prince Charles as the next king. Another attempt at a republic seems unquestionable with Elizabeth still on the throne.

His son, Prince William has vastly greater public appeal. Being reared in far less of the stiff-necked royal life than his father was. In addition, obvious public sympathy over the death of his mother, Princess Diana.

The 'royal plot' would perhaps be to pass straight from Elizabeth to William. Charles may have agreed to this directly. His marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles, a (shock-horror) divorcee, has precedent in making one unfit for Kingship. Edward VIII was forced to abdicate for such a 'crime'.

The public will adore the new Royal Couple, especially as King & Queen. Kiss goodbye for another generation, at least, to a republican push. Many will be pleased with this outcome.

The competition between femininity & feminism. There seems to be one clear winner here. The obsession with the wedding reveals much. Kate was famously urged to get a 'real job' in the long lead-up to the wedding. Quite understandably, the job of being a future princess was seen to be much larger. It surely eclipses many trivial pursuits.

The 'duty' of the princess is now clear. Although they have been in a relationship for a long time, the wedding means one thing to many. Time for breeding duties. 'An heir & a spare' is the primary goal.

Coverage of Kate has focused primarily on her sense of style & fashion. On how good she looks. It is hard to escape the belief this is foremost amongst considerations. Judging by Princess Diana & the coverage seen so far of Kate, it is indeed. Gossip magazines demand so - they are a vital feedback mechanism in keeping the royals relevant.

In conclusion, the Royal Wedding is a big tick for the status quo. Forget outmoded dreams of advancement, they are but pipe-dreams. What you see is what you get. It is in one way refreshing to have this confirmed, as dreary as the consequences may be.

Chris Judd on the Football Media

Can a footballer also be a thinker? This is a dishonest question, as the answer is clearly yes. It is admittedly on rare display. Again, it begs another question. Why put questions to a footballer that are greater than football? 
Here is why:

 "..it's good for the game to have football spread out so (the media) don't feel the pressure from Tuesday to Thursday to write dribble."

"The football public sometimes gets confused about what it is we do, and if you spread out the games, there is more time to spend talking about football and it reminds the public what the game is about." Chris Judd

The football media's job is to cover football. We all know this can only be the case on or near the weekend. Being immediately close to game time.

Look at 2011 and its pre-season. The lack of meaningful games to cover gives rise to gutter journalism & dribble. The months leading up to the begining of the season can be considered one colossal, mid-week belly scratch. Very little to be achieved, and even less is offered by the football media as a whole. This is a common trait between AFL & Rugby League coverage. Worldwide, the trend is identical.


The rise of 'investigative journalism', a by-word for sensationalist filth, naturally fills the gap with its lewd stench. Emanating from this pit of keyboard despair, each year the body count gets higher. The stories more far-fetched. The material ever more ghastly.

The 'St Kilda Schoolgirl' (Kim Duthie) story exemplifies all of the above traits. It has been ongoing for a year now. It shows no sign of disappearing into the horizon. The only time it does retreat into the background - when the damn football is bounced.

The notion of reporting trash as fact has been covered in past articles. This is a power that a third party of (considered) repute can easily exercise. Recklessly.

What is missing? In the case of football - the spectre of an imminent game. It is that simple. Its absence will cause events to spiral out of control. Please spare us. Bounce the football at more regular intervals. Parasites may only be cleansed with a regular bathing. Lest they grab a foothold.

A similar question (as asked to Chris Judd) would be fascinating put forth to Nick Riewoldt. The unfortunate captain of the St Kilda Football Club. A lamb to the slaughter. A retreat into cliche is the expected, and forced result of the barrage Nick Riewoldt has sustained. He may never utter another word about anything off-field. Even on-field happenings will be avoided in substance. It is the price to be paid for inferior coverage. Self-inflicted by the smattering of narcissistic football journalists.

It has been an absolute misery of a lead up to the football season. The worst on record. End the pain now. We beg of you.

--------

In all likelihood, football played 5 or 6 days per week will be difficult to function. It is important not to take Chris Judd's message as literal. The void in between the weekend does need to be filled with on-field matters. Possibilities include delaying the post-match conference of the last weekend/Monday game to the next day. Pushing forward a Friday pre-match conference to Thursday etc. Perhaps the banning of questions related to non-football matters during these events as well.

All efforts need to be made to keep the content on topic. The men are mere mortals who play a sport. That is all. Other matters are irrelevant and pervasive. In a sense, the football body has to parent the media coverage in addition to its other concerns. Basic acknowledgement of this would be a huge step forward.

The problem with off-season coverage is a huge headache. I scratch my head here. It can be said that tackling the mid-week content issue may provide solutions applicable to the off-season (to some extent) also.

----------

3rd Aug 2011

A 4-day football weekend is the best solution. A few have been scheduled this year, and they work the best.

In saying that, since the football season actually started - the coverage has been excellent. ie minimal concentration on junk issues not to do with the on-field performance.

This is not Consent (Woman beds 200 AFL players)
  

Sex Scandal - NRL - Matthew Johns

Ben Cousins - In the Beginning

Internet Censorship in Australia

Welcome to the internet. Home of the free. Land of the brave. Um, I can't use that. Allow me to start afresh. Here resides all & any information that may be desired. Right at your fingertips. Ahem, most information. Come surf the rich ocean waves of the world wide web. Well, paddle between the flags. Let us not quabble over semantics. All this & more ....

A salesman would get nowhere with this pitch. Hamburgers with no meat. Doors would slam endlessly in his face. Something else is missing. A bit of magic & exuberance. To fill the empty bun in one hit.

Enter - the touchstone of anal politics - Family Values. Ah, things have become a whole lot easier now. Family values can mean pretty much anything the speaker wishes. The tone of voice. A pump of the fist. So many possible interpretations. Family values covers all bases. Most importantly, home base. No need to push any further for ideas.

What is scary? This is actually how simple the debate has occurred. It is over and has been won. 1995 saw the introduction of garbage laws to this end. Australians far and wide have a vested interest in over-turning this hideous refereeing decision.

Protecting children and families is a vital matter for coalition senators, and it is also something that Senator Fielding, the Leader of Family First, has raised with me on a number of occasions. The government has a three-pronged approach: we legislate, we regulate and we educate to protect all Australians, and particularly young Australians, from inadvertent dangers of the internet.
Senator Helen Coonan 2005

It is quite reasonable that the vast majority have not noticed the effect of censorship. It covers 'Australian-hosted sites' only. Overseas websites are not legislated against, yet. Thus, it is typical for Australian content to be posted on overseas sites. The whole situation is very Monty Python. As well as being a total joke, it is deadly serious. And economic stupidity.

Under the WA Act, police do not even need a warrant to search the premises of Internet Service Providers, which obviously includes all records, logs, private E-mail messages and other data contained on the provider's system.

The opposite of family values? Freedom of expression comes close. It is a workable answer. Merely that. Freedom of expression needs a juice-up too. A trick of words will not suffice.

Freedom of expression is vague. Everything is covered, like with family values. All the negatives are included, also - the freedom to be offensive, explicit or shocking. FV conveniently ignores the same pitfall, it is more personal.

Offensive, explicit & shocking are not entirely negative. There is one clear upside to being so. Money or fame. Yep, it is okay to be any of these as long as you are not a useless nobody (by public estimation). Radio DJs, singers & artists are easy examples. The family crowd will sneer viciously at the individual. Equally, be in awe of the cash potential that dwarfs their own. The sneer will match the envy.

Freedom of expression now has a very rigid definition. A real oxymoron. The only acceptable reason to pursue freedom is to make money/fame/both. Failure to correctly walk the tightrope will result in expulsion. Chalked up as a win for the clattering imbeciles. This cannibalistic act will not be registered as such.


Money, in particular, matches family values pound for pound (pardon the pun). For the most part, they share the same dressing room. FV is nothing without the influence to spread it. Also, new toys/technology for the kids etc only heightens the risk of new content that may violate FV holy law.

From a completely circular argument, the counterpoint to family values is defined.



Get on the phones, the match to family values has been found.



From the figures in China, most internet users do not actively try to get around their country's well known policies. I read it as 'could not be bothered'. This is not a criticism of Chinese internet users. The point is that legislation/dictatorship of this kind, allowed sufficient time, will fester. It will drastically reduce the citizen's interest in a free internet - even if it could be switched on overnight. This is far more horrible than the censorship itself.



Publication or transmission of objectionable material

    (1)     A person must not use an on-line information service to publish or transmit, or make available for transmission, objectionable material.

Penalty:     240 penalty units or imprisonment for 2 years.

Right now, spin doctors and their ilk are getting big dollars. Of taxpayer's money. The advertising is coming. The early talk campaign has been waged.


Ah, no delete that comment. I never said it



Internet censorship is well and truly on the cards. 



Internet censorship is a ghastly apparition.

Going Public Ahead of Time - Monahan & Bingle

A former TV star, Sarah Monahan, has come out claiming improprieties. The stories have been doing the rounds on current affairs programs. Monahan was a regular face on the below-par (though it ran for at least 7 years, in primetime!) TV show, Hey Dad. Robert Hughes played her father. Cast members have backed up the story, also in the press.

Therein lies the problem. The police have reported they are yet to receive a formal complaint. Despite my personal beliefs, which say Hughes is as gulity as sin, the legalities of the matter have been ignored. If everyone, or a great majority have the same inclination, a fair trial cannot be undertaken. The making public of claims has destroyed the possibility. The judiciary would be biased from the beginning and unable to make impartial decisions.

The claims of other Hey Dad actors seem to clearly back up Monahan's story. Another of Monahan's claims is that she wanted other victims to gain the confidence to come forward. This appears to have happened. A string of other claimants have jumped up. Whether formal complaints had been made previously is unknown to me.

Alas, another problem has come about from this. Newspapers etc have been rushing to interview the other claimants. This could damage their individual cases. The same pattern could be repeated.

As a tactical move, it is possible Monahan was advised she would have little chance of a conviction - pursuing the matter directly. In taking the action she did, the hope may have been to gather a phalanx of accusers, making life impossible for Hughes. That is all well and good if they too did not put themselves up for media interviews. It seems most have, including their names in press reports.

I can't see any possible legal ramifications for Robert Hughes. I believe he will get off scot free in this instance. The damage done will be purely to his reputation. I am unaware of any acting work that he has done recently. He also resides in Singapore. From his point of view, as long as he does not come back to Australia, the damage is limited.

This allows a flimsy segue into the Lara Bingle imbroglio. Bingle was photographed in the shower, nude, by her former shag, Brendan Fevola. This appears without doubt. The photo was subsequently distributed far and wide. Fevola claims he lost his (camera) phone.

The problem with the Bingle/Fevola affair is precisely the same as with the Hey Dad pitfall. Bingle gave an interview to a 'leading' women's magazine, Woman's Day. For a reported $200k! She lost most or all credibility immediately. The same magazine had published the photo, publicly, for the first time but a week before. Her agent, Max Markson, pumped out some pre-rehearsed lines, which went down like a lead float. The police were also sidestepped - a huge motivation appears to be sheer profiteering by Bingle & Markson.

Sarah Monahan has been receiving a large amount of hate mail, in the same vain as Lara Bingle. The method of public dissemination needs to be seriously questioned. As a tactic for direct action, it is one of the poorest moves available. This is entirely seperate from the actual facts.

------------------

Have thought a bit more on the issue. My only conclusion is that in both cases, it was decided the legal avenue was a dead-end. The tactic decided on was public shame & humiliation in place of legal recourse. It severely undermines the message. It makes it too hard to really care about from a distance, as harsh as that may sound.