AGB Footy

LOIG TOIMS

There are plenty of footy shows on TV, The Footy Show, Rex Hunt's show, Gary Lyon's show, On the Couch, Talking Footy, but my favourite, without doubt, is League Teams on Fox (Thur 8:30). It's informative, entertaining and enjoyable but most of all, it's devoid of the hype or sensationalism prevalent in all the others. In fact it's down right casual, just like a couple of footy fans sitting chatting about the game at half time at the MCG. And missing, thank fuck, the Voice Of The G or the water torture that is SA-KA-TA. Nope, it's an hour of must-watch telly for any hard-core footy fan. And me. You all know I've only a passing interest in the game.

The show entails discussion by four main protagonists....

Anthony Hudson (Huddo) is the host. He keeps the team under control by pulling the reins when the show threatens to run off the rails. Footy heads love mixed metaphors. Personally, I reckon he does a better job here than he does as a commentator because he's not afforded any opportunities to slip into a shrill "IT'S EASY BEING GREEN!!!!!!!" (Go Demons!)  mode.

Mike Sheahan's (Mike) the panel's incumbent scribe. As an experienced hack he knows how a footy story is generated, and he's then able to light a burner under the right pot when he sniffs a hint of an issue. I'm not convinced he's in the same ball-park as either Patrick Smith, Caroline Wilson or Rohan Connolly, but he presents as someone who know's his footy and is able to present it in a genial and straightforward manner. All that can be asked from a Herald Sun pounder.

Russell Greene's (Greeney) the straight man. He's also the PE teacher at my old school. Still is as far as I'm aware. Not that that has any relevance to this post. He's a low-key kind of guy. If you think he borders on boring you mightn't be too far from the truth. Never the less, he does is job. Which, fortunate for a straight man, is to not interrupt the others when they're getting into stride. And it was bloody funny a few weeks back when a cramp made him jump around the studio.

The last panellist is former Essendon/Geelong/Essendon ruckman John Barnes (Barnsey. Surprise). He's the trump card here. He's got a sense of humour, likes to make the odd outrageous, but obviously tongue-in-cheek, remark: "Bomber Thompson? Hopeless coach! Wouldn't have a clue." or: "Peter Bell?!? Dud! He's got the easiest job in the world. Just runs round the back taking handballs." then looks plaintively at Huddo "Well, he has!" but most importantly, he does know the game. And is, in fact, probably liable to say a bit much for the liking of the Essendon match committee of which he's associated.

These four pundits work well off each other to neatly balance the combination of fun and information. The only drawback is when there is a guest panellist, as there was last week with Matthew Lloyd. Sports shows should NEVER incorporate present players! Well, they shouldn't!

Also, because the show's on Foxtel, there's a lack of the continual reference to sponsors products peppering the other shows. Aquila shoes, Four & Twenty pies, Rexona deodorant, Red Tulip chocolate, Holden/Ford/Nissan cars, or a panellist's latest book venture: "Specky Magee - My Career Stats." As far as I can tell the only visible sponsor is Ralph Lauren. This is fortunate because it means each comment's not polluted but some poisonous reference linking an event to a brand: The Radio Rentals Eight-Seven-Eight-Double-Eight-Double-Eight Goal Of The Day". Blast from the past there.

Another thing is that they don't adhere too strictly to the running sheet. This assists the casual feel. Last week Anthony Hudson introduced the segment on the Bullies/Dockies game. This went well for about one minute until they started riffing about the Kangaroos. This went on for about five minutes until Barnsey asked "What do you think Huddo?" to which Huddo replied "Not much, we were talking about the Dockers!" Nice control from the little man.

There is another element at play here. I may be imagining things, but I'll swear there's a bit of friction between Huddo and Barnsey. C'mon! Surely someone else out there has noticed it. Anyway, it seems that Huddo keeps trying to jab Barnsey when the latter makes one of his outrageous comments. Mike & Greeney seem to get the gags and keep shtum, but Huddo whether he's missed it or not, often-times feels he has to spike the comment.

Last week they were at it again. The panel was talking about Geelong. If you're not familiar with the Catters then you need to know they're a very frustrating team to barrack for. Often pulling off an upset but even more often, losing games they were meant to win. Not at all like Melbourne. Not at all. I. Said. Not. At. All.

The Pussies also had the recent fortune to have a magnificent player who took them to Grand Finals in 1989, 1992, 1994 and 1995. Each time they were met with an opponent who was considered to have had one of the best seasons ever. So sadly for the Hand-baggers, they lost them all. They haven't won a flag since 1963. That's a lifetime ago. Not at all like the Demons (1964).

Anyway Barnsey, more strongly associated with Essington, played for the Glomesh during those years so he's got a strong attachment to the club and understands their frustration. Huddo, as it happens, also barracks for them. So it is with relish I report on the following exchange....

Mike - "Barnsey, do you reckon Jee-Long can beat Wet Toast this week?"

Barnsey [Emoting] - "Well Mike I wish I could explain it, but I'd love [grimace] to see [hiss] the Cats [gnash] get on a roll [suck teeth]."

Huddo - "YOU ought to BARRACK for them!"

Barnsey - "YOU ought to PLAY for them!"

Touch�. Turtle. Game. Set. And Match. Mr Barnes.

I'm sure as I got up really close to the telly. You know, like we all do, to try and look around the edge of the screen, I could see Huddo sinking back into his chair, head Foo-like, barely over the table. Oops.

Nope. League Teams. 8:30 Thursday. Fat fee. Cholesterol free. Niacin. Iron. Riboflavin. With just the right amount of viewing fibre. Do yourself a flavour.

PS: Another good reason to like Barnsey is that I know of a bloke who was chatting up Barnsey's wife at a pub and Barnsey just walked up and tipped a beer over his head and laughed. Primo.

NEW BLOG

On a subject rarely, if ever, mentioned here, Rob thinks, Rob blogs.

STOP! IN THE NAME OF SPORT

This up-to-the-minute, hot-off-the-wires post is brought to you courtesy of the following article (and the letter D) which appeared in Saturday's Herald Sun....

Caller gets in tune By Jeremy Culvert

DO not adjust your sets, it is all part of the wacky Denis Cometti show.

You may think the fast-thinking footy commentator has finally lost his marbles when he waxes lyrical about the love of a beautiful woman during Sunday's clash between West Coast and Melbourne. But he is just meeting a challenge.

And he has been doing it all year.

Thanks to the wags at Perth's 96FM breakfast show, each week Cometti is set the task of melding the lyrics of a popular song as seamlessly as possible into his game call.

The bizarre challenge started with "Busting makes me feel good" from the Ghostbusters theme song -- aptly applied by Cometti to a pack-busting tackle -- and he has not missed a trick since.

96FM listeners fall over themselves each Friday to nominate a line, then the whole of Perth stays glued to the set to see if Cometti succeeds -- all the while delighting in the ignorance of us Melburnians.

"Knowing that you guys must just be thinking the guy is unhinged makes it even funnier," 96FM breakfast host Gavin Miller said.

"We have been waiting all year for the penny to drop over there."

Cometti has demonstrated some fancy footwork to incorporate the lyrics. "Like a virgin, touched for the very first time," he rates as his toughest challenge.

But he saw his opportunity and seized it during the West Coast - St Kilda clash when the Eagles only got their first touch in their forward zone 20 minutes into the game.

"That was just dumb luck," Cometti said.

Usually it is not so spontaneous.

"It is totally premeditated -- you have to sit down before a game, and visualise where it has half a chance of fitting in."

Only now, after a season of raised eyebrows, are Melburnians getting wise to the Sandgropers' in-joke, and have now added to the challenge.

Radio 3AW's Ross Stevenson yesterday nominated his own line, "When you're in love with a beautiful woman", for Cometti's Sunday call, doubling up with 96FM's existing challenge: "Dirty deeds done dirt cheap".

Gavin Miller's a dick! There's something sad & pathetic about wankers who brag they're "IN" on a gag.

"We have been waiting all year for the penny to drop over there."

But Gav. Mate. Buddy. Pal. It has! Don't mistake our laugh-lack for ignorance. We've known about it all year. Cometti admitted the gag on MMM before Easter. During the Wizard Cup. To Sam Newman & Little Jimmy Brayshaw.

So, listen here me ole wacky, zany, crazy, prank-calling, hip-talking, morning-show funster - "Whoo Hoo! Coming up the other side of the M-Sport update, another claaaaaaaasic no-repeat-workday, Pearl Jam triple-play!" - we hear it, we get it, but guess what? We don't want it! It's not funny.

Dennis Cometti is the best caller in the land, but he's also plenty funny enough without "TRYING" to be. There's already enough cheap theatre in footy coverage without him joining in on some lame commercial FM gag. Imagine if everyone started doing it. What next? Yeah! What next? Suggestions in the comments box please.

And Gav? This one's for you dude - "He blew his brains out in a car!"

ROAD RAGER CONFRONTS HIS OUTER DEMONS

Not surprisingly, the House Of Pain is on Nasty Street....

A MAN attacked a bus carrying Melbourne football players from Subiaco Oval to Perth airport after the game on Sunday.

Police are investigating the apparent road rage incident which is believed to have occurred after the bus overtook a line of stationary vehicles.

Traffic at the ground was at a standstill and it is believed the team was on a tight timetable to meet its return flight.

Managing director of the bus company David Van Kuyl said a window was shattered by the force of the offender's punch.

The man who threw the punch cut his hand, spraying blood over the side of the bus.

"He came running down the side of the coach, jumped in front and punched the window," Mr Van Kuyl said.

Hope it hurt.

PAT WATCH

The other day I quoted Big Whispering Jack's assertion that, and I paraphrase....

"Wayne Jackson had been able to keep Patrick Smith happy by feeding him information."

To be charitable, I don't find this practice particularly evil. As long as the journo isn't claiming wise visionary status and as long as we dumb readers are aware of it. After all, if I know the background I've got a better shot at making up my own mind. Don't I?

I've a suspicion something like this may have happened when Smith was the only journo who backed the umpire over the Nicholson/Lloyd double free. How come he had the umpire's story well before all the other scribblers?

However, if the following cosy couplet is anything to go by, it seems the trend might be set to continue. The issue is Carlton's salary cap penalties and Patrick Smith's dismissal of suggestions the AFL was too hard on the Blues.

First Patrick paves the way in Tuesday's Australian....

To understand how outraged the commission was at Carlton's endemic cheating, the club was treated with some leniency after Stephen Silvagni and Craig Bradley voluntarily reported schemes to pay them illegally. Thank heavens they did, otherwise Carlton may not have got into the draft until 2006. No, the punishment has been handed down and you expect will not be revisited. Carlton's plight has everything to do with poor management and nothing to do with the draft. And the AFL couldn't care less.

The way clear, Jacko consolidates the position in yesterday's Herald Sun....

Jackson was unrepentant last night when asked whether the penalty was too harsh and revealed that if it hadn't been for Elliott's successor, Ian Collins, coming forward to the AFL, the news would have been worse for the Blues. "The penalty was not inappropriate," Jackson said at the Hawthorn's president dinner at the MCG. "This was a club that cheated and rorted over a period of years and they deserved everything they got and, arguably, quite some more. The AFL Commission gave due account to Carlton because they did come forward. If it wasn't for Ian Collins, and the Craig Bradleys, and Steve Silvagnis of this world, the penalty on Carlton would have been greater than it was."

One, Smith pounds out an article critical of Carlton. Two, Jackson makes a statement critical of Carlton.  It may just be a coincidence, but if it happens too often it's liable to lead people to surmise Jackson and Smith are in cahoots.

A clinical one-two or a lucky coincidence? Make up your own mind.

PS: I agree with Smith and Jackson. The Carlton penalties were too light.

Update: Scott Wickstein, still in posession of his wits after the Crow's soft loss yesterday, make's the point about Smith's recent non-use of of the term "Calamity Castle" for Telstra Dome. Good point. And Smith even tried on the slippery eel last Friday....

First called Colonial Stadium and now Telstra Dome, it was called many other things by the public who queued for hours for tickets even when the stadium was quarter full. These people called it very different names � Calamity Castle, the House of Horrors being the most polite versions.

The public? These people? Tongue in cheek? Surely Patrick invented "Calamity Castle".

DYER 'ERE NO LONGER

Vale Captain Blood!

FOOD FOR THOUGHT

You can say what you like about Jack Elliot's new book, but one thing's for sure; it's thought provoking. Consider this excerpt from the Herald Sun on Wens-dee....

Wayne Jackson is a very complex person. Wanting everyone to like him, he spent a lot of time in the early days getting the press on side. the press always give evryone a honeymoon period and the AFL always has stories it can leak to the press. So right through Wayne's leadership of the AFL he's been able to keep the leading football writers (Mike Sheahan at the Herald Sun, Patrick Smith at The Age and now the Australian, and Caroline Wilson at The Age) happy by feeding them information.

We'll deal with Smith. Consider his article from last Wens-dee....

Telstra Dome, if only it can keep away from controversy, may well change the traditional home of football in Victoria as the MCG waits for the rebuilding to be complete.

The previous Wens-dee....

Telstra Dome. It might just be turning into the stadium of choice for Melbourne's football fans.

Not forgetting his love letter dated August 9....

IT was sudden and unexpected. And in the end rather brilliantly done.

And, of course, today....

Australian football will soon have a new home if it doesn't have one already.

Something of a theme here. I'm not suggesting Smith's on the AFL payroll, but courtesy of Dick Alston and the Courier Mail we've recently been reminded of how organisations and the press swap favours.

As for Telstra becoming the home of footy. Well, it's recent prominence is similar to the place you stay while the bathroom is being rennovated. Let's wait and see how Telstra Dome goes against a re-built 95,000 customer capacity MCG. Don't forget, it's the home ground of both Collingwood and Richmond. Either of which can fill the stands many times during a good year.

There is also much noise made about how the AFL will own Telstra Dome in 21 years. But 21 years is a long time. Next year the MCG's new Ponsford stand will be finished. After that there are going to be two new stands built. Who's to say that in that time the MCG's standing as the premier stadium in the country won't be further enhanced by the redevelopment. In 21 years, Telstra may be seen a a nice place to go on a cold day, but hardly the place to go to watch the big events. After all, it's unlikely to ever host a Grand Final.

Telstra Dome is a terrific place to watch footy, but this push for prominance reminds me of the hullabaloo made about Albert Park during the construction phase of the Grand Prix track. That fuss was more a political gambit against the Kennett government. And I suspect the same applies with the AFL's attempts to get the MCG to relinquish finals.

Patrick Smith can write some fine stuff, but in the past he's been particularly tough on certain individuals. Shane Warne, Jeff Gieshen, Grant Thomas and Gabriel Szondy, to name but a few. They've all been on the receiving end of his almost personal barbs. Not to mention his so-called "Humour pieces". So if Smith's prepared to go over the top to be nasty, there's no reason to believe he wouldn't go underneath to be nice.

Of course, I'm merely thinking out loud. But, for all his faults, I'm sure Big Jack would agree.

PAUL HASELBY

Demand. And supply.

TERRY WALLACE

Let me first say, I don't like Terry Wallace. There. Said. He's your typical footy trog who inflates the language of football by injecting gratuitous fat-speak. Hence, a clearing kick from defence becomes "a pin-point cross-over transitional transference of play". A spoiling defender has "prosecuted a copybook Sherrin capture denial". And in a speak crime guaranteed to attract the attentions of Amnesty International [Word Dept], the team all us footy plebs refer to as the Bullies gets strapped on a rack and in Terry-Talk becomes the tortured "Western Buwdogs Footbaw Club". Although Tel's not alone with the latter example of extravagantly prolix verbosity.

Yesterday in the Herald Sun there was yet another article about the release of John Elliot's revisionist bleat book, Big Jack: I Know Nothing! My Sporting Life. One suspects there are more on the way. Anyway, in the excerpt he pots Wallace....

Former Carlton President John Elliot has claimed Terry Wallace said he could bring a $250,000 sponsor and a well known player to the club if the Blues gave him the coaching job.

The Hun sought out Wallace for a reply....

Wallace last night confirmed he had briefly spoken to Elliot about the coaching position after the Blues boss had phoned him, but described the other claims as rubbish.

"Can he get out of the eighties?" Wallace asked when told of the claims.

Cute. But it means nothing.

"There are rules in place that would not allow that (bringing players) anyway."

So what! Wallace's denial is that the allegations can't possibly be true because player transfer rules have changed. True. They have. But they don't stop Wallace convincing a player to transfer from one side to another at the end of a contract. As, for instance, Nathan Brown might at the end of this year. And what's with the "anyway" anyway? Makes his denial sound a touch open-ended. Just a thought.

What strikes me though is that it's another in a long line of Wallace denials that are staunchly offered up as a concrete defence. Each utterance accompanied by a dismissive, yet sincere and friendly, demeanour. But that don't sound particularly convincing under further examination.

Remember the furore over the match against Wet Toast when three of his players virtually assaulted Michael Gardiner. Wallace's response?

"Shucks. We wouldn't be talking about it if it was an experienced player involved."

Rubbish! It would have been front-page news if the target was a media darling such as Jimmy, Vossy or Bucks(y). However, for one reason or another, the media swallowed it and the issue went away.

What about allegations he instructed Tony Liberatore to play football like a Pit Bull Terrier? Or that the Bullies were particularly adept at staging for frees. Not that the latter's a crime, just unsavoury.

"Gee wizz. I've never spoken to the team about those kinds of things."

The team. Not individuals. I have it from a Bullies player that Wallace would regularly pull selected players aside and instruct them in how best to get under the skin of an opponent. Either with words (Fraser Gehrig) or actions (Paul Kelly).

And what about his response to suggestions he was leaving the Bullies to coach the Sydney Pinks?

"Awwww. I've never spoken to anyone at Sydney."

No one seriously believed Wallace HAD spoken directly to anyone at Sydney. Doesn't mean his people (Craig Kelly?) weren't talking to Sydney's people. Granted, a long time after the event (this year, in fact) he denied he was being payed any compensation by Sydney, or someone allied to Sydney, but it doesn't mean he, or someone representing him, have NEVER talked to the Pinks or their connections. He has never denied that someone behind the scenes had formulated a deal. And there's not a football insider in the land who doesn't believe that Wallace had the Sydney job.

He's also stated....

"C'mon fellas. I couldn't coach Sydney, could I? Roosy's there and he's doing a great job."

So what! When's the last time a newly appointed coach was concerned about the predicament of his predecessor? When's the last time a new coach was appointed to an existing team that didn't previously, for whatever reason, have a coach that needed replacing? There's ALWAYS a previous coach. But once again, a friendly and sincere non-denial denial was tendered and accepted.

There's a pattern here. Whenever Wallace finds himself in a controversial situation he always manages to sleaze out of it by using sneaky language. And he's aided in no small measure by the reluctance of the matey ex-footballer club that make up the bulk of the footy media (especially the electronic part) to adequately put him under the microscope. That's why I always read Caroline Wilson, Rohan Connolly, Mike Sheahan, Mark Robinson, etc before I come within cooey of an article by an ex player/coach. Apropos to that, if you ever bump into Caroline Wilson, ask her what she thinks of the Sydney issue.

NOT ALL BLACK AND WHITE

I dunno why there wouldn't be one out there somewhere, but I can't seem to find any recent Heritage Game articles online.

Anyhoo, glancing at The Age, it would appear the original Collingwood jumper isn't as similar to the modern one as Eddie would have us believe. Sure it's got black and white vertical stripes, but there's no doubt he'd be more than a little peeved to find out it's, in fact, the Essendon jumper that bears greatest resemblance to the original.

This is what it says on the back page....

COLLINGWOOD - The design is based on the oldest surviving Collingwood jumper on display at Victoria Park. The jumper was worn by R.T (Bob) Rush in 1899.

ESSENDON - The jumper remains almost unchanged since Essendon started in the VFA. The red sash is thinner than normal, a symbol of the days when the players wore an actual red sash over one shoulder.

While that adequately describes the Essendon jumper, the original Pie jersey has four thin black stripes on a white background. Only two of which are on the front. It looks more like a basketball top.

It might be possible the Rush jumper is a one-off. But it might also be possible Eddie's nauseating rhetoric about Collingwood's eternal jumper is a load of cobblers. Or is that tailors.