MEDIA RANT #1
At times the sports media in NZ are a joke. Actually, the joke is on me because from time to time I still buy newspapers and listen to the radio. Unfortunately I need to as part of the game that is sports betting is staying in touch with what's happening in the sporting world. I'm slowly getting into the habit of surfing the internet for news, but haven't quite weaned myself off the regular trip to get the daily, yet.
However, a couple of articles from the weekend papers will help accelerate the process. I'll concentrate on an article in the Sunday Star-Times headed "2005: Year of the Cambo". This riveting read started with the outstanding claim:
"You read it here first. Michael Campbell will clean up at the Halberg Awards for 2005"
Wow. I've paid $2 for some journo to tell me something I (along with no doubt many others) thought about two months ago, some three seconds after he sank his last putt at the US Open. For him to suggest he is the first to have this earth-shattering thought at least gave me a bit of a chuckle. The humour value steadily increased. After half the article gave me further insights into his vast knowledge of New Zealand sporting history (such as "only one other Kiwi - Bob Charles at the British Open in 1963 - has won a major golf championship" - a fact any half-knowledgeable sporting Kiwi knows), the scribe managed a left-field turn by using the rest of his precious column inches to bemoan the fact that rugby union has missed out at our top sporting awards.
"Rugby has suffered a raw deal at the Halbergs in recent years ... our national sport hasn't even really been in the hunt for the top award since 1987, when the All Blacks won the teams' section"
Umm, the fact that the All Blacks haven't won the Rugby World Cup since 1987 might have something to do with it. This is one of my biggest gripes about sports journalists; yes, rugby is our national sport/obsession and I don't begrudge the profile that sport has, but when some of our writers who obviously have had a few too many free lunches at rugby grounds around the country start to imply rugby somehow gets a "raw deal", my blood pressure increases.
It reminds me of the time when the Rugby Union suggested they should get some form of government assistance like other sports; this from an incorporated society that pays no income tax on turnover of $90 million a year. Yes, rugby really has a "raw deal" in this country, my heart bleeds in sympathy.
With profile comes the territory. The no.1 sport has higher expectations placed on it, and so it should. No way should rugby ever receive a sporting award unless it achieves the ultimate - a world cup triumph. The journo then somehow manages to convince himself that because rugby players haven't featured in the awards, then there must be an "obvious flaw in the Halberg awards":
"They are weighted heavily in favour of individual athletes, particularly those who compete at the Olympics ... individuals within teams rarely get recognition in the sportsman and sportswoman sections"
This guy's research obviously stopped at last year's awards for 2004, which happened to be an Olympic year. When NZ wins 5 medals, 4 of them by indivdual athletes, then of course individual Olympic athletes are going to dominate the nominations. If he bothered to turn the history pages over, he would have found a netball player (Irene Van Dyk) as Sportswoman of the Year in 2003, and 3 out of the 4 finalists for Sportsman of the Year in 2002 were from team sports (and got upstaged by another golfer, Craig Perks).
The humour continued when, after pointing out this "obvious flaw", he unwittingly answered it:
"It's difficult to pick individuals out of (a team) for special recognition"
No doubt why the Halberg Awards have, in addition to Sportsman and Sportswoman categories, a Team of the Year award and a supreme winner from those three categories. Perhaps the writer should ponder why for example, a rugby player should have two bites at the cherry - as a member of a team eligible for a team award and then as an individual in the sportsman category?
The article signs off by saying:
"It's also a great shame we can't celebrate top performances by our All Blacks at the Halbergs"
Well, actually, when they produce a top performance, like winning the world cup, I'm sure it will be celebrated. The real shame is I continue to be conned into buying newspapers full of crap such as this. One day I'll learn.
However, a couple of articles from the weekend papers will help accelerate the process. I'll concentrate on an article in the Sunday Star-Times headed "2005: Year of the Cambo". This riveting read started with the outstanding claim:
"You read it here first. Michael Campbell will clean up at the Halberg Awards for 2005"
Wow. I've paid $2 for some journo to tell me something I (along with no doubt many others) thought about two months ago, some three seconds after he sank his last putt at the US Open. For him to suggest he is the first to have this earth-shattering thought at least gave me a bit of a chuckle. The humour value steadily increased. After half the article gave me further insights into his vast knowledge of New Zealand sporting history (such as "only one other Kiwi - Bob Charles at the British Open in 1963 - has won a major golf championship" - a fact any half-knowledgeable sporting Kiwi knows), the scribe managed a left-field turn by using the rest of his precious column inches to bemoan the fact that rugby union has missed out at our top sporting awards.
"Rugby has suffered a raw deal at the Halbergs in recent years ... our national sport hasn't even really been in the hunt for the top award since 1987, when the All Blacks won the teams' section"
Umm, the fact that the All Blacks haven't won the Rugby World Cup since 1987 might have something to do with it. This is one of my biggest gripes about sports journalists; yes, rugby is our national sport/obsession and I don't begrudge the profile that sport has, but when some of our writers who obviously have had a few too many free lunches at rugby grounds around the country start to imply rugby somehow gets a "raw deal", my blood pressure increases.
It reminds me of the time when the Rugby Union suggested they should get some form of government assistance like other sports; this from an incorporated society that pays no income tax on turnover of $90 million a year. Yes, rugby really has a "raw deal" in this country, my heart bleeds in sympathy.
With profile comes the territory. The no.1 sport has higher expectations placed on it, and so it should. No way should rugby ever receive a sporting award unless it achieves the ultimate - a world cup triumph. The journo then somehow manages to convince himself that because rugby players haven't featured in the awards, then there must be an "obvious flaw in the Halberg awards":
"They are weighted heavily in favour of individual athletes, particularly those who compete at the Olympics ... individuals within teams rarely get recognition in the sportsman and sportswoman sections"
This guy's research obviously stopped at last year's awards for 2004, which happened to be an Olympic year. When NZ wins 5 medals, 4 of them by indivdual athletes, then of course individual Olympic athletes are going to dominate the nominations. If he bothered to turn the history pages over, he would have found a netball player (Irene Van Dyk) as Sportswoman of the Year in 2003, and 3 out of the 4 finalists for Sportsman of the Year in 2002 were from team sports (and got upstaged by another golfer, Craig Perks).
The humour continued when, after pointing out this "obvious flaw", he unwittingly answered it:
"It's difficult to pick individuals out of (a team) for special recognition"
No doubt why the Halberg Awards have, in addition to Sportsman and Sportswoman categories, a Team of the Year award and a supreme winner from those three categories. Perhaps the writer should ponder why for example, a rugby player should have two bites at the cherry - as a member of a team eligible for a team award and then as an individual in the sportsman category?
The article signs off by saying:
"It's also a great shame we can't celebrate top performances by our All Blacks at the Halbergs"
Well, actually, when they produce a top performance, like winning the world cup, I'm sure it will be celebrated. The real shame is I continue to be conned into buying newspapers full of crap such as this. One day I'll learn.
Labels: media
posted by Rob Crawford at 8:47 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home