After Grog Blog

PUNCH LINE

Interesting conversation in class this morning. Two students were telling me how one of the other teachers always tries to share jokes with them, but instead looks like a "total tool". They couldn't have been more contemptuous.

Naturally, I managed to look po-faced. Can't condone a lack of respect for faculty members. Not outwardly, anyway. When they'd finish shitcanning the teacher I gave off an extremely convincing "You shouldn't bag the other teachers ... when I'm in the room." They love that line.

The member of staff they were bagging is one of those people who loves to tell "jokes" but flatly refuses to get anyone else's as she waits her turn to tell another "good one". Should you happen to crack wise on the odd occasions you bother striking up a conversation she always looks as if she's going to punch you on the nose. And while she doesn't get it, she's too scary to rib.

SOLIDARITY, SIR

On the off chance you're a Melbourne Grammar teacher reading this blog I thought it well past time you were told the grim news: I'm a teacher, too.

I DID BUT SEE ME PASSING BY

A conversation:

A: "I heard Sir Robert Menzies had a mistress."

B: "Really? I thought he was only in love with himself."

Just wondering - how many Prime Ministers have had a bit, or bits, on the side? A considered response would be appreciated. Failing that, wanton slander will do.

STRAYA, YOU'RE STANDING IN 'EM

Or not, as the case may be.

Nothing quite says "Have a great Australia Day" like a pair of moccasins left to loiter in our school carpark.

But really, when did Australia Day become a greeting day? Tones Delroy greeted callers to last night's Challenge: "Have a great Straya Day, Pat from Mt Lawley." Karen Tighe welcomes listeners to Grandstand: "Happy Straya Day." Once upon a time this business was restricted to Christmas and other birthdays, then it was Mother's Day, then Father's Day, now Australia Day. It can't be long before celebration day creep encourages people to "Have a great Tuesday."

Today used to be a nice, peaceful day of watching cricket from Adelaide - Go the Aussies! - with maybe a Roulettes flypast. Now, because we just have to overegg the golden goose, Straya Day has become a Have A Great Day Day with simulcasted fireworks. It gets right on my tits.

The public holiday is fuckin' grouse, but.

GET SHORTER

Just finished watching Funland: Carter Krantz sets off oop north from London, looking to find out what happened to his mum, and finds himself plunged into a sick morass of pornography and nastiness.

If that sounds familiar, it is. Funland is a TV series with a basic plot similar to the seventies movie Get Carter.

Naturally, though, if you are going to expand a movie out to a TV series, you need to throw in a whole lot of extra detail. Funland does that in spades. For a start it moves the action from Newcastle to Blackpool; presumably a haven for all sorts of deviant behaviour. And Jack Carter was trying to find out what happened to his brother, not his mum. There are also many more characters. But while Get Carter is taut, tough and wickedly cool, Funland is violently gaudy and overlong.

(Movie makers thirty years ago seemed capable of telling a story without resorting to histrionics. Not that they didn't get carried away back then. A dour glare was enough to carry a moment of menace. Today's movie makers chuck the kitchen sink at the viewer. Bad guys spasm around brandishing ordinance to make sure you know they're the villain. Maybe it's the same mentality that causes sport organisers to have fireworks.)

To be fair to Funland, it goes alright, certainly it starts off well. The first three or four episodes are perfectly entertaining telly. But by about episode five the impact of all the dildos, strippers, leering pervs, gangster crones and gay taxidermists is wearing off. Around episode eight you're mainly still watching because you want to find out what happens in the end. Who did what to who and why. That's the difficulty of crime stories. With the core thrust being whodunnit, it's almost impossible to stop wondering whodiddit. Unless the story or characters are exceptional enough to keep you focussed on the moment, at some point your attention will drift, as mine did. The last third of Funland just wasn't interesting enough to stop me going "Ok, let's be having it then."

Funland runs to 390 minutes, that's 132 hours for those of you not good with clocks. Were it cut down to around four hours it would have worked much better. 240 minutes at most.

HAVE YOU READ ANY GOOD BOOK REVIEWS LATELY?

I haven't. I was forced to give up reading book reviews when I was diagnosed with a rare condition caused by the phrase intensely readable. (Unless I write it myself.) There is no cure.

As yogurt is to dairy, reading reviews of book reviews is allergy neutral.

Reviews of fillums are an altogether different matter:

One personal idiosyncrasy is that while I adore books that are astonishing, I do not feel the same way about other genres. Films as varied as “The Queen,” “The Last King of Scotland,” “The New World,” “Catch a Fire” and “World Trade Center” have all been labeled “astonishing,” but for me the word does not resonate in a celluloid context. And while it may be true that “Half-Nelson,” “Gabrielle” and “X-Men: The Last Stand” are all astonishing motion pictures, I have not seen any of them, as I personally do not enjoy “astonishing” motion pictures.

A poll. "The Queen" will be:

I. Boring.
II. Astonishing.
III. Worthy.

WIRETIP

Amanda:

So T, did you ever get to The Wire? I finally got around to it recently and have watched most of the first four seasons (half way through the most recent series) in the space of a couple of weeks. Am totally addicted and looking at the handful of eps I have left to go with trepidation because when its over, I'll be bereft. Just have to go back and watch them all over again I guess.

I did. To date I've watched Season One and Season Two, and completely agree with Amanda. The Wire is fantastic and I have no hesitation in pronouncing it to be the best thing on television last year, even though it wasn't on television last year. I've got Season Three on order. Watching a show on DVD is so much better than watching on telly. In fact, if you wanted to you could watch The Wire on Channel Nine at the moment, it's on late Tuesday night. But then you'd miss the extra commentary, and have to put up with the various retail opportunities.

The cast is superb. At the risk of cherry picking from a sensational ensemble, Stringer Bell, Brother Mouzone and Omar Little are three particularly good baddies. The plotlines are tight and clear despite having to incorporate intricate surveillance details. Mind you, I could be a little hazy here; it's been a while since I've bugged a scag baron. The bluesy soundtrack, while slightly repetetive, works well.

Then again, it is HBO. The Sopranos, Deadwood, Oz, Rome, Curb Your Enthusiasm, The Larry Sanders Show, Six Feet Under, if that's your thing, Sex in The City, if you're gay or a guy out to impress the girls. Has there been a better production house/TV station? Can I make a bold statement? I prefer The Wire to The Sopranos. I'd almost go so far as to say it's better than Deadwood. A tough call. Deadwood's impact lessened slightly across the three series whereas after two series The Wire shows no sign of slackening off. It's a beauty. If you are going to criticise the show at all, you could maybe have a pop at the acting, which can be a little ropey. And I assume having a wise old black guy named Freaman is a bit of a gag.

In December my best mate came back from a year working in Broken Hill and asked if I had any new DVDs. I told him I had this show called The Wire. "Is it as good as The Shield?" he asked. To which I replied "much better." (I'm not massive on The Shield, although it goes alright.) He gave me a look that was all 'yeah, right', but took Season One nevertheless. The following night he rang up "Got Season Two?" He'd watched the whole season back to back. I took round Season Two and two days later - he spent a day moving furniture - he rang again "When you getting Season Three?" High praise, indeed.

The AGB Verdict: "The game's out there, it's play or get played." 9½/10.

BOLLOXXXX

"Groan. It's like watching Margot Fonteyn play Twister."

Boynton, after stumbling upon the Beach Cricket on Ten. I wasn't nearly as charitable.

THE HAND THAT SIGNED THE TEAM SHEET

Years ago, 1987 to be precise, I was playing club cricket in Perth. It was the last game of the season and, batting first, we'd racked up about 300 when the skipper declared to give us half an hour at the opposition before stumps.

One thing, though. Why hadn't our best batsman batted? I asked the captain if Frank was injured, or something. He replied "no, we needed quick runs so I moved him down the order because he's a slow scorer," before rushing to add "he would have come in next." I never realised we needed quick runs, but I didn't think any more of it.

Until beers that night.

Turns out there were two guys in the running for that season's Batting Average Award: Frank and the skipper. Frank, despite clearly being the best batsman, had missed most of the season due to illness and was about 10 runs shy of qualifying for the batting average; he would have walked it with an average of about 60. The skipper, despite being barely OK with the bat, had taken every match to qualify with an average of about 30.

Thus, by moving Frank down the order, and well out of the way, the skipper had managed to win himself the Batting Average Award. I never bothered showing up the next Saturday.

THE CRINGE DWELLERS

Aussie humour's a funny thing, isn't it.

What are we best at?

The usual cliché routinely trotted out on Australia Day goes like this. We're always been great at sport. Not to put too fine a point, we've err . . . punched above our weight. We’ve more recently been congratulating ourselves on the end of our 'cultural cringe'. In fact our cringes are still fairly healthy in various respects not least in our economic achievements - as indicated by our sad insistence on describing things in such terms as 'world competitive'.

1. William Burroughs' Baboon:

We’re also very good at humour: viz Gunston before Ali G; Aunty Jack before Little Britain; Frontline before The Office; Vizard before Letterman.

9. Tony.T

Most of our humour is dismal. It makes me cringe.

13. Nicholas Gruen

Tony T,

"Humour" is too broad a category by far. I think Australians have a great sense of humour. Subtle, ironic, low key. It suits some genres (like cartoons) and hasn’t worked that well with others. But Barry Humphries seems to manage. And Frontline was a great show. So it depends.

I miss things. For years I thought "I'm staying home to wash my hair" meant hair washing was a big deal; I never realised it was a brush off. Am I missing something here, too?

Speaking of humour: How The Hell Did We Get Here? The Baby Boomer's Guide To Comedy. How The Hell was yet another "Top 20" affair in which Aussie faces vote on the usual suspects: Frontline, The Paul Hogan Show, Mother And Son, The Naked Vicar Show, My Name's McGooley, The Aunty Jack Show, Full Frontal (or Fast Forward), The Games and Kath & Kim. Pretty much what you'd expect, right. I often suspect the faces in question vote for these shows because they were involved in them.

But before you jump to the confusion it must have been an all-Aussie affair, the 20 contained numerous foreign shows: Laugh In (18), Yes, Minister (9), Get Smart (8), Absolutely Fabulous (7), Monty Python's Flying Circus (5), Fawlty Towers (2) and Mash (1).

This is where my cringe quivers into action.

Were I putting the list together, the only Aussie show I would have included would be Frontline. The Games would have had a look-in, but it was a little too Clarke-Dry for me. McGooley is before my time. I thought Aunty Jack was rubbish, but I only ever saw it when Channel Two disinterred it a few years ago and like Peter Beattie, I loved the theme song. Most of the rest I detested, or at best tolerated. Mother and Son, in particular, shits me to tears.

The shows I would have included are mostly foreign. Yes, Minister, Get Smart, Flying Circus, Fawlty Towers, Ripping Yarns, Dad's Army, The Royle Family, Hancock's Half Hour, I'm Alan Partridge, Will & Grace, Seinfeld, The Young Ones, Cheers, Newhart, Herman's Head, The Dick Van Dyke Show, Porridge, The Larry Sanders Show and Night Court.

You can argue all you like about the baby-boomerishness of my list, but the ABC show covered about 40 years, so mine did, too.

I've never seen The Office and I've only just started watching Curb Your Enthusiasm. Boynton reckons CYE is a "grouse" grouch show like One Foot In The Grave, but I've never seen that, either. Guess I'll have to assume it's nothing like the completely shitful and hideous faux-grouch Becker.

MORIGAMI FOLDS

Clisters defeats Morigami 6-3, 6-0.

UNKNOWNS KNOWN

Once again, the Beeb's 100 things we didn't know last year:

1. Pele has always hated his nickname, which he says sounds like "baby-talk in Portuguese".

to

100. In the 1960s, the CIA used to watch Mission Impossible to get ideas about spying.

ANSWERING MACHINE

People using phones to cheat at trivia is already rife enough without the newspapers' Saturday Glossies advertising the cheating as a good reason to buy a blower.

Where I go to trivia there is a twenty question sheet handed out at the start of the night which needs to be handed in towards the end. It's amazing how often teams with poor average scores suddenly get 20 out of 20 for your more difficult topics.

But I do like the little picture in the corner of the ad. A bloke is being carried away on a hospital gurney while the attendant says "It's just a game mate."

By the way, you'll be interested to know that last Thursday's Late Night Challenge went until 1:22. Friday night's was only up to question 14 just before 1:00. It was fair dinkum agony.

FIGHTY ALL

Balkans have been brawling at the tennis. As if that's news. Yet despite adding much needed zest, at least to week one, you can already see tomorrow's headlines: Race Ruffians Run Riot, The Yugly Face of Tennis, Hrvatska Dumb. Well, maybe that's a little obscure, but you get the picture.

STACKS ON

Time to lay your Dunlop Volleys into Keith Stackpole, who has rated the Channel Nine commentators in today's Hun. A few conclusions:

1. He's a fossil who wouldn't know a good, modern commentator from a bowl of sago pudding.
2. He must feel sorry for Standout Bill after watching Ian Healy spend the whole summer embarrassing his old mate.
3. He's copped out with Simon O'Donnell as a commentator, as opposed to host of The Cricket Show. Simon is a terrible caller and Stacky should have said so.
4. He's copped out with Richie by not rating the Doyen.

And anyway, what sort of pinhead talks of accuracy by making a mistake? England made 291 in the first innings in Sydney, not 159. The Poms made 159 in Melbourne.

Lawry pick of bunch

WHILE our focus has been on the field, performances off the field have been almost as stunning as Australia's domination of England.

Hats off to the Nine network for its superb coverage of the Test series. The Ashes had great appeal and was going to be easy to cover, but Nine used several innovations which worked well.

Three commentators on air at the same time brought a freshness to the coverage, already the best in world cricket. There was more discussion and analysis from the commentators, unlike previously when the focus was on the action on the screen.

One innovation, the Hot Spot, was overused early but once they worked out the right times to highlight a decision it was an effective tool for commentators and viewers.

The cameramen deserve huge plaudits, too. They never miss a beat. Nine's camerawork, always of a high standard, reached new heights with the use of slow-motion replays and detailed close-up shots.

I worked as a commentator for Nine for nine years and am close friends with several of the team. But I call it as I see it and try to be unbiased in my preferences.

This summer my former opening partner Bill Lawry has been the standout performer.

Nine's hierarchy recognise his ability to inject life into any contest. I believe the network's management in Sydney directed its production staff to ensure Lawry was on at key periods during the Tests.

Lawry speaks his mind and is not afraid to disagree with the doyen of commentators, Richie Benaud. (Standout - 10/10)

During the fifth Test at the SCG, Bill was on with Richie and Mark Nicholas and they were discussing England's first innings total of 159.

Nicholas and Benaud argued that it might not be a bad score given the pitch and humid conditions when Lawry dismissed their assessment with this: "I think it's a 300-plus pitch." He was right.

Tony Greig, the commentator many viewers love to hate, also performed well as one of the other leading callers. Greig's job, like Lawry, was to call the action and initiate discussion with his two sidekicks. His role was made tougher by England's pathetic efforts on the field and his approach would have much different if the Australians were on the back foot. (Love to hate - 8/10)

Ian Chappell's analysis was second to none, as usual. (Ananlytical - 9/10)

I believe Mark Taylor should be used in a similar role, rather than as the ball-by-ball caller. (Pertinent - 8/10)

Nicholas fills the hosting role with aplomb, exuding the necessary confidence and professionalism. I believe that is his forte, rather than calling the game when he tries too hard. (Tries too hard - 7/10)

The enthusiastic Michael Slater shows a lot of promise, but often uses too many words. Sound advice from Richie could help him overcome this. (Enthusiastic - 7/10)

Ian Healy was a fine wicketkeeper, but does not appeal to me as a commentator. When I listen to Healy, I often wonder if I played the complicated game that he is talking about. He has also been used as an interviewer this summer, but Taylor outpointed him at the end of the final Test when he asked more pertinent questions than his former teammate. (Too complicated - 6/10)

While Nine has plenty to be pleased about this summer, there are several areas that should be improved.

The Cricket Show shown during the lunch break needs an overhaul and its host Simon O'Donnell still looks ill at ease in front of the camera. (Ill at ease - 5/10)

My major complaint about the coverage is that the scoreboard is not shown often enough, not just the two batsmen at the crease.

Nine has made a play to boost its female audience with the introduction of Stephanie Brantz as an interviewer during quiet spots in play. Her first-up performance was credible and she tried hard.

For my last word about Nine's coverage, there is only person to mention -- the masterful Richie. His role has been reduced, but his influence remains immense. He commands respect with his insightful comments and his quirky anecdotes makes great listening. (Too good for too long to rate)

IT'S NOT ALL HAPPENING HERE

VB, anyone?

WHACK WHACK WHACKADOO

Rohan Connolly is banging on about cricketers doing advertisements. "Q: How did Jeff Thomson become such a great bowler? A: Jelly." Big deal. I don't mind in the slightest that Thommo spruiked Pioneer Jelly, Maxy Walker addagoodweegend, or Dennis Lillee called, called Carpet Call's experts in the trade. Nor, for that matter, did it worry me that Tubby and Hookesy, Hoooooooookesy, HOOKESY! flogged airconditioners, or that Gilly shills ... whatever it is he's shilling on the banks of the Swan River. Tractors? What bothers me are the other ads, the ones on very, very high rotation. The Bunnings series with actor employees telling what fun it is to sell left-handed screwdrivers, mozzy zappers and ballcocks; last season's green Bunnings ads with the line animation and the nooo nooo nooo nooo nooo (rhymes with pooh) soundtrack; and the aforementioned Whackadoo (rhymes with nooo) with the Mojo Singers selling Toyotas.

The cricketer ads are fine by me, the others are eating my brain.

SLOG BLOG

20 down, Twenty to go and I want to like the concept, really I do, but you know...

WHAT?ERRR TORTURE

Some of you will know Tony Delroy's dreaded Ordeal By Trivia which airs every weeknight on ABC radio. Now, I love trivia and Tone's topics are generally good'uns, but his callers would shame any KGB interrogator as they connect electrodes to the easiest of questions via a string of painful procrastinations. "I'll just ask the brains trust." "It's right on the tip ... umm ... ahh ... ohh, gonna have to pass." "Dunno. But before I go, I'll just say hello to Errol in Eucumbene." And my own personal sliver of sharpened bamboo "C'I've a clue?" But despite the agony, and the suspicion callers are buying Google time, there is the odd moment of comedy relief:

Bernadette: "In which ocean is the Diamantina Deep? A) The Indian Ocean; B) The Atlantic Ocean; or C) The Arctic Ocean?"

Caller: "The Pacific."

DADS ARMY 5 - DUDS ARMY 0

The wash, it is white.

THE CONCERT FOR BINGLADESH

Relegating the video to a mere comment didn't seem to do it the justice it deserved.

GNOT AMUSED

Once again CricAussie have gnome issues with CricInfo. Killjoys.

"This continues to demonstrate their juvenile and infantile approach to covering cricket, and it is disrespectful in the extreme," CA spokesman Peter Young said. "It doesn't do their credibility any favours. If they wanted to be taken more seriously, then they need to reflect on how they approach things. This is gratuitous, infantile and shows a complete lack of maturity."

Get a grip, pal.

Going by their match day "entertainment" CA know all about infantile.

And will they will have a lash at Geoff Lawson? Tuesday Henry spent an age throttling any remaining life out of gnome jokes, including the "metro-gnome", the "vetro-gnome" and the ... something or other. Stitch my sides.

CATCH 42

Many consider The Gilo grassing Punter in Adelaide to be the moment that turned the series; a "dropped the Ashes" moment. Had the big scapegoat caught it Australia would have been in a heap of trouble, but he spilled it and Ponting went on to post a century and set up an unlikely win.

Were you to read too much into that particular balls up (or down) you might suggest England were the catching klutzes in this series; they do have had Geraint, afterall. A look at the stats tell another story.

Up until last night Australia had taken 42 catches out of 50 for a percentage of 84, while England had taken 35 out of 41 for a percentage of 85. The big difference is that England's drops have been bloody costly, whereas when the Aussies drop one, they invariably dismiss the "lucky" batsmen soon after for little or no damage.

Why do I highlight this now? Well, because I'm sick of commentators telling me how good Australia are at catching. Yes, we take a lot of catches, but we also drop far too many. Certainly too many for the commentators to be perpetually in raptures with the likes of "Bloggs won't drop this" or "Bloggs never drops these" or "Straya rarely drop catches."

Do the commentators, pundits and assorted spruikers think we are fools?

This morning on SEN Mark Allen and Liam Pickering were raving about Shane Warne's work in slips. "He never drops anything," blathered Allen, admittedly a golfer. To which Pickers was at least moved to add "Apart from Warne dropping the Ashes of Pietersen." No mention of Warne dropping a doddle off what would have been a Damien Fleming hatrick in Adelaide. No mention of how Warne should have caught The Pies in Perth except that he was too busy thinking up sledges. They aren't the only chances Warne's spilled in recent years. There seems to be this ludicrous misconception he is irreplaceable at first slip.

Elsewhere, look at the 2005 Ashes. How costly were our misses then? Don't forget Gilchrist dropped Pietersen at The Oval before Warne did. Martin Love put down a sitter off Omari Banks when the Windies chased their record at Antigua in 2003. India here in 2003/04, without Warne and McGrath creating more chances, was not a pretty story.

Even when Sideshow Roy, one of the best fieldsmen in the world, caught Pietersen in Perth, my primary reaction was relief that Sidey hadn't put it down. I shouldn't have been even slightly flustered; it was a sitter. Surely, that's a sign things aren't exactly as they should be with our catching.

PUNCHES NOT PULLED

While it's raining at the SCG - typical Sydney - let's see what Rodney Hogg thinks of the other bloke:

Jon Anderson: Can Brett Lee and Stuart Clark fill the void left by McGrath?

Hoggy: Clark can, but I'm not sure about the other bloke.

Ando: Hang on, he got his length right in Melbourne and started to move it at good pace.

Hoggy: I'm talking about when he got Collingwood caught at short cover by Justin Langer. He stood in the middle of the pitch with his arms raised in the air like he'd just bowled the best ball ever. What a wanker.

Lee's recent reverse swing has been welcome, but until he can find some surprise bounce, like Clark, people will continue to question his worth. That skidding trajectory allows batsman to roll onto the front foot and play him with relative ease and when he wants to unsettle batsmen with a lifter, he has to pitch it too short. There's probably a right length for him to bowl, but he's yet to find it consistently. Then again, maybe they like Lee to mix it up.

Hoggy does stirling work on SEN and some of the looks he gets from AB on Inside Cricket are priceless. Sadly, there's rock all chance of him being allowed anywhere near the commentary team of an "official broadcaster".