Horse sh1t from Rod Curtis in The Age. Eli Manning plays for the New York Giants, not the Baltimore Indianapolis Colts:
Money is a curse unless you can buy it out
The New England Patriots have won three Super Bowls in the past seven years and, if it wasn't for the Indianapolis Colts' ridiculous final-minute play in this year's decider, when Colt quarter-back Eli Manning somehow extricated himself from a tackle deep behind his line of scrimmage, and threw a mighty hail-mary downfield, which David Tyree somehow jumped up and caught one-handed against his helmet, Boston would now be the baseball, basketball and football champions of America. Or, if you believe the T-shirts, the world!
Sports journalists ought to stop cracking on about how much sportsmen get paid. If someone wants to pay a bundle for a sportsman's worth, then the only issue is whether or not the sportsman delivers - as long as he behaves himself. (I'll leave it up to you lot to define "behaves".)
Maybe Rod Curtis wants sportsmen to get paid the same as sports journalists. But if that was the case, 90% of sports journalists would be out of work. Instead of a twelve page Age Sports lift-out, there would be a one page Age Sports page. And anyway, if Curtis was a fantastic sportsman and someone wanted to give him $60 million dollars to play, he would play.
Why (in general) are so many Aussie sports journos such simpletons when it comes to their analysis of American sport? The NBA, like the AFL, has a salary cap and a draft. The Celtics operated within these systems to trade aggressively for their star players. It's not like they just opened the chequebook and bought a ring.
For the record, the Celtics had the 7th highest payroll this year ($74.8m) and the Lakers, their opponents in the final, the 6th ($75.3m). The worst team in basketball (by an absolute contry mile) was the New York Knicks, with, you guessed it, the most expensive payroll in the league ($90.9m).
Posted by: Gareth | 19 June 2008 at 16:17
Spot on, Gaz.
And as well as misrepresenting the case vis-a-vis the lack of salary cap reference, it's also strange that a sports hack could make such a fundamental blue.
Yes, Eli's brother Payton plays for the Colts and led them to the SB a couple of seasons back, so there is room for confusion for the casual observer. But the Curtis brief is to write a weekly Wednesday essay on sports from around the orb and here he is making a howling... errrr, howler regarding who played - or didn't play - in this year's SB. Not a a typo, but a full-on detailed paragraph. You've got to ask yourself: Did he even see the SB?
Posted by: Tony T | 19 June 2008 at 16:42
Agree with all this.
The laziness of non-US sportwriters when they are conmmenting on US sports beggars belief. I know that they have to target their work at the lowest common denominator but simple fact-checking isn't that hard is it?
Admittedly, reading US journos pontificating about cricket can be just as excrutiating - and if I read another analysis of 'best ever sportsmen' that namechecks Gretsky, Jordan etc without mentioning Bradman.....
Posted by: Mark | 19 June 2008 at 23:59
The best ever sportsman debate has come back into vogue after Tiger Woods' efforts just recently. It's interesting to see what different angles people come from when coming up with their lists.
Some people highly rate individuals in team based sports, whilst others don't. Some give more athletic pursuits precendence over those less physically demanding. Some give sportspeople a tick for playing games that are worldwide over those played by only certain countries. Even in the AFL, more kudos has been put on those with exemplary private lives (Hird, Buckley) than those who arguably had better records on the field (Ablett, Carey).
Like any list its completely subjective, but it means all the more if a criteria is set out before these lists are published.
Posted by: Adsy | 20 June 2008 at 09:57
Tony, Mark ,I often wonder about this and my pet theory is that it's a cultural thing. Australian sport comes from the amateur tradition, it's club-based and community-based and only recently has money entered the picture.
American sports, on the other hand, have a long tradition of true professionalism. That is, sports are really an entertainment business alongside the cinema, theatre, whatever. Athletes have always been paid professional salaries. Baseball has a 100+ year history and culture of disputes between labour and management. Sport is business because it's always been business and athletes earning the big bucks are celebrated, not derided (that is, unless, they fail to perform).
I just think Australian sport fans (and journos by extension) really get it - it's a cultural thing.
Posted by: Gareth | 20 June 2008 at 10:51
Er, that would be DON'T really get it.
Posted by: Gareth | 20 June 2008 at 11:02
I made a dumb mistake, fellas. I know Eli's a Giant - I'm a Dolphins fan and had $20 on the Giants at $7 in the SB, so yes, I watched it, pretty happily in the end - but I had 25 minutes to write the column because they'd sent me out to the Fenech-Nelson pre-fight training bollocks all day, then asked me to file on that for news. I wrote Foreign Bodies in a mad, pissed-off rush, and it read like it. I wrote Manning, my brain wrote Colts, and when I read it in the paper next day I winced. Then I came into work and opened my mail and winced and winced and winced ... I must have got 30 emails about it, which frankly proves the interest in American sport here, despite the lack of coverage it gets.
Was well impressed to hear from both Ed Wyatt and Steve Salisbury from Only in America on SEN Sunday nights, to encourage me to write on American sport (but get it right) and to offer ideas and a sounding board.
Gareth, that's an excellent stat on the payrolls. Wish I'd known that. If I'd had my time over, I simply would have argued that Boston was now arguably the most successful sporting city in the world, and looked at the options, rather than pissing and moaning about their success. And I have no issue with sportsmen's salaries, although I do have concerns about how the Roman Abramovisation of sport compromises the contest.
Anyway, you live and learn. I enjoy your blog, Tony, and would happily take on any suggestions for the column.
And you're right, I'd take the 60 mill.
Posted by: Rod | 04 July 2008 at 12:00
Thanks, Rod.
Just so you don't think we sit around here taking aim at MSM, I like your stuff - National Harpoon: reads like you had fun putting that article together - and, in fact, most of the stuff on the back page of the Age sports liftout. Leaping Larry L, Paul Daffey, yourself, Cam Noakes.
Pull the racing bloke, though. Hideous caper. If it ain't got a ball, it ain't a sport.
Posted by: Tony T | 05 July 2008 at 18:09
Allright, allright. Looks like we're all up for a group hug then. Altogether now "Squeeze, squeeze...Sink!".
Posted by: pat | 06 July 2008 at 17:22
To be fair, I think you're fair, Tony, and yes, the sumo was good fun. No horsesh1t there.
Going with A-Rod this week. How can you not?
Posted by: Rod | 09 July 2008 at 13:42