SORRY STATE OF UNFAIRS

Sex scandals. Drug scandals. Umpire abuse. Goal umpire abuse. Tribunal inconsistencies. If an incident EVEN gets there. And the far too ubiquitous and corrosive conflicts of interest.

Apart from comprising just another season of AFL fun and frivolity, what else do all these events have in common?

At some stage, lurking with hypocritical intent within the framework of each -- Except perhaps for the COI's, which are loftily shrugged off: "Aww shucks. I'm a good bloke. I wouldn't do anything wrong" -- there will be a specious Public Apology.

A player flagrantly flaunts the rules, and in doing so, is caught bang to rights. He subsequently fronts the media to announce that's he's become a guilt ridden wreck as a result of his uncharacteristic moment of madness.

Those who strutt the rarified corridors of our sporting institutions, the club officials, team-mates, sports entertainment "personalities" and assorted media sucks -- especially those from the network with the most invested in the player -- then attest to said player's "heartfelt contrition", insist his actions were "totally out of character", contend they'd be extraordinarily surprised if the player "ever did it again", and just for good measure, feign sympathy for the injured party. Dramatic voices and concerned looks abound. If they don't feel that's sufficient, they'll then insinuate it was probably -- nudge, nudge -- the injured party's fault.

Finally they'll suggest the player's sincere (forthright, frank or genuine) apology was the sign of a good man ... a fine man ... and yes ... a solid citizen.

Down here on earth, the rest of us call it damage control....

In the sporting circus, even contrition is a polished performance

Whatever the wrongdoing, it's essential to appear sorry - and, in Logies week, there have been several performances worthy of a gong.

For a moment on The Footy Show, you would have thought they were about to pass handkerchiefs around. James Hird had just apologised, all sincerity and operatic voice. Father Eddie, who conducts confession every Thursday night, dutifully wore his mask of concern. Overcome by this act of contrition before him, he empathised: must have been a tough week for you, James. It was all very moving.

Hird was fortunately too far away, or Eddie might have cuddled him. Why wait until tomorrow? The first Logie could have been handed out then and there.

Scott McLaren would be silly to sue, but he is entitled to wonder whatever happened to fairness. Now even he must be thinking: was I the one who screwed up?

Elsewhere, Craig Stevens might be contemplating the same. It's a wonder he hasn't apologised for pushing Thorpey into the pool. Well, didn't he? The kid's not even announced what he's going to do, yet the debate has already ended over who's going to replace him. It's Craig's choice, we say nobly. Umm . . . what choice exactly would that be? Of course, he can swim the 400 if he wants. For New Zealand, perhaps.

Maybe at the end of it all, Thorpe will hand over one of his gold medals. Stevens will blush. Eddie will buy the movie rights.

Hird is a truly terrific fellow, Thorpe has been all grace. But are we playing favourites? It's so much easier to forgive a nice guy, especially if he has a television contract that allows him to clear his conscience.

Similarly, if that was Lleyton Hewitt instead of Thorpe, we'd think a push might not be out of order. It's all about a fair go, right?

Sport as circus has been well-advertised this week. We're not sure what we've learnt, except that athletes first learn to manipulate a ball brilliantly, and then dedicate themselves to mastering the art of the mea culpa at the feet of their agents.

Athletes cannot breathe these days without an agent holding their hand and going, "There, there". Everything is stage-managed to the point where it is impossible to separate the real from the performed anymore.

You can almost hear an agent saying: "Mrs Beckham, please ensure you are seen holding David's hand in public. Of course, indoors you can let go. And if you are going to slap him, please take off that ring in case it leaves a mark."

Hird's story, no doubt, is going to become a case study at every publicists' school. First conclusion: say what you want post-match, not three days later, or "heat of the moment" becomes irrelevant. In case of delayed reaction, ask your manager to suggest your faculties were impaired.

Second conclusion: say what you want to a scribbling reporter in a busy corridor amid the chaos of defeat. That way you can say the reporter quoted you out of context, or better still, had an agenda. Remember, it is difficult to be misquoted on TV.

Third conclusion: if nothing works, one last route to redemption remains - the penitent news conference. Arrive in suit, wife in tow, look suitably downcast, blink back tears if necessary, claim misunderstanding, invoke family and God, read prepared statement with choking voice. View Kobe Bryant tape if necessary. Become the victim.

But here's the problem. Barring John Howard, sorry has become the easiest word and no one is convinced anymore.

Athletes break an opponent's ankle with a tackle that has "deliberate" stamped on it and insist tearfully they have had trouble sleeping since.

They hurl bigoted remarks at rivals, then produce X-rays to show they haven't got a racist bone in their body (teammates will swear to it, but then teammates will swear to anything).

They summon the media or appear on TV to explain themselves, only to conclude by saying: "I would be grateful if the media respected my privacy."

Of course, no one barring those who think The National Enquirer is the gospel believe any of this. No doubt, some of it is genuine remorse, but we are faced with such a barrage of apologies from athletes that we are now conditioned to view them cynically. We don't see regret, we see an athlete desperately trying to preserve an image. We don't see repentance, but an athlete trying to get off lightly.

Not all athletes deserve our scepticism, and the Essendon captain, particularly, does not deserve a genuine goodness to be blotted by one misdemeanour. Except once the circus began, only one thought resonated: haven't we Hird this before?

Of course, there's an inconsistency here too. Brijnath rightly criticises the facile nature of the symbolic get out ... sorry ... ahem ... apology ... then -- by implication -- is critical of John Howard's refusal to apologise to ... well ... someone ... anyone.

Can't have it both ways, Rohit ... sorry.

Comments

[D`Anerah[IW]]

Sorry!

I'm laughing so hard, i am almost crying.

I really am sorry

[cs]

Hey Tone, I was away. What was the final score in the Beatles poll?

Ooops, that has nothing to do with the post ... err ...um ... sorry (choke).

[os]

Essendon manage a total campaign, not just a game by game season.

One of the points of Hird's attack on McLanren was to sow a seed of caution in the mind of the umpiring fraternity. It will pay off for Essendon at a future time of crisis, when in a moment of hesitation, remembering the pain Hird and the Essendon machine inflicted on McLaren, another umpire (maybe even McLaren himself) will hesitate for that crucial moment and then decline to penalise an Essendon infraction.

$20,000 is a good investment to buy a big let-off like that.

And they did the same to the tribunal. Not only did it win a game against the Eagles when Lloyd got off his conviction and kicked 8 straight, it sowed another seed of doubt in the umpires' minds when reporting Lloyd. He's such a PRETTY man, who could think he would do anything nasty? When he dresses up, the girls melt and grown men dream of their long-lost youth, no-one would take the side of a geek umpire or a faceless tribunal.

Lloyd, like most forwards, takes too much crunch when the backmen accidentally-on-purpose fall into them with knees in the back (I've played Centre Half Forward for the mighty Denmark Magpies, believe me, I know how that feels) so I respect the fact that he gets pretty pissed off from time to time, but that still doesn't mean he can jump up and do the umpire's or the tribunal's job and lay one on the backman. Now he has more leeway to do just that, because the ump will think "why bother reporting this bloke, even if he gets suspended, the media circus will crank up and an appeal will succeed".

The AFL as theatre.

[Tony.T]

Chris, here's the Beatles result....

http://aftergrog.drivelwarehouse.com/archives/007351.html

Pretty fair summation, Os. I see Essendon got a VERY good run from the umpires when the third-quarter heat was on last Friday night against Scumton.