Cop This

I have complained many times, that the sportsmanship has virtually evaporated from Olympic events. That is so, but it is more so in modern day cricket and football. The football codes in Australia are the most shocking examples, as they combine the dissolution of sportsmanship with thuggery.

The governance of the various sports in Australia is a prime example of the failure of “self-regulation.” Typically, whenever a section of Australian society comes under threat of being regulated by one of the levels of government, it is characterized by barrages of shivers running up the spines of those involved in the section. To avoid such a situation, the section then advances the idea that it would be better for all if the industry (as sections like to be euphemistically called) formulated its own code (sometimes a code of ethics, sometimes a code of conduct) and then administer compliance with the code “in house.”

The various forms of football in Australia have elevated self-regulation to an art form. As with most sports, there is an established set of rules that stipulate how the game should be played and scored, and stipulating behaviours that are unacceptable and that may result in penalties being awarded during or after a game. In these body contact sports, many of the transgressions of the rules of the game involve behaviour that not only breaches these rules, but breaches the laws of the land. The various administration bodies of these sports have succeeded in having these transgressions dealt with “in house” by self-appointed tribunals that can deal out sanctions. Such sanctions usually take the form of the player being banned from playing for a given number of matches.

As sport in Australia is perceived as a very important part of communal life and conversation by many, so the players, especially in the higher grades, become important influences in the lives of many followers and spectators. They also become very important role models for younger followers and younger long-term aspirants. Consequently, their on-field behaviour affects not only other players, mainly their opponents, but also members of the public, including youngsters.

All major fixtures of football, as with other major sporting fixtures, are required to have a police presence. These games are often televised, and therefore they have a complete visual record. Many of the transgressions of the rules of the game also constitute assault, or even assault occasioning actual bodily harm. If an assault occurs elsewhere in the community and is not witnessed by police, then successful prosecution for such an offence relies heavily upon the willingness of the assaulted or witnesses to testify. If such an incident occurring elsewhere in the community is witnessed by police, then the police are obliged to take action, irrespective of the willingness of potential testifiers. In a football stadium, there are police witnesses, and, as already stated, generally a video recording which can also be used in evidence.

Rather than having an “in house” tribunal impose a game loss or disqualification penalty on a player who assaults another on the field, the witnessing police should intervene in the game and remove the offending player where appropriate, or institute later criminal action against the player where further examination of the recorded evidence is appropriate.

Let us call a spade a spade. Let us label criminal assault as a criminal offence. Let us demonstrate in no uncertain terms to youngsters, especially, that such behaviour is not only unacceptable, but also criminal. That way, upstanding players could truly become sporting heroes, and sportsmanship could be revitalised.


Crankyfella

A Job of Work

For those readers who were relieved that I had not put finger to keyboard button for a long time, and were taking bets that I had disappeared from this mortal plane, let me disappoint you by announcing that I am back on the job. Unfortunately, I contracted a dreadful, exotic respiratory bug from some of the papal pilgrims that otherwise brought much joy to Old Sydney Town recently. During the latter period of my partial recovery, I have been very busy, indeed, ensuring that I do not, even accidentally, watch any of the televised events from the Beijing Olympics. Olympic events just serve to make me an even crankier old Aussie.

I have let my enfeebled mind wander and ponder over the merits and demerits of the Olympics for some time now, and have come to the conclusion that the Olympics died when the rules were changed to allow professional competitors. By “professional,” I do not mean those who have undertaken an intensive course of education, observe a code of ethics, and then practice their chosen calling by the observation of a strict fiduciary relationship with their clients. No, no, no, I simply mean that they perform in their chosen field, which they consider sport, for a monetary reward. In other words, I mean those who do it as a job.

This transformation of sport into jobs is evidenced in most of the interviews with participants when asked about their attitudes to protesting about the treatment by the host nation, China, of Tibet and Tibetans. The typical response is, “We are not involved in that. We are just over here to do a job, and we are going to get on with it. Our job is to bring back medals.”

In fact, it would appear that their “job” is to promote themselves as products; to escalate their value as sporting commodities on the open market. What a perversion this represents of the term, “sporting.”

Let us lament the passing of Olympic “sport,” “sporting,” “sportsmanship” and “being a good sport.” They all died when the strict requirement of amateur status was abandoned.

For all the rhetoric about the phantom of the “level playing field,” how can such a thing ever exist when full-time, often very highly paid competitors from affluent, developed countries compete against those from poor, often war-torn, developing countries whose representatives often consider themselves fortunate if they can afford a pair of shoes of any description for use in their events. Well, I suppose that the argument must go that competitors from under-privileged nations simply lack the initiative and drive necessary for them to succeed in “the job.”

What a pity it is that we cannot bring back to sport the joy of the activity, the helping of others less fortunate, the forging of new friendships, the appreciation of the efforts of others and the recognition of others as having a love and interest in common.

I would like to see a proliferation of jobs for our Olympians. However, I do not mean the occupational sort; I mean good, swift left-hook jobs into the midriffs of any competitors who prattle on about being over there to do a job.

Crankyfella