Character Assassins 'R' Us

Strange Fortnight From SMH

What has the Hon Prime Minster Kevin Rudd and Socceroo Harry Kewell have in common? Both had scathing things written about them by journalists which, no matter which way you read them you wonder how the writer came to such outrageous conclusions. First off there was David Marr with his long article here.

Marr famously kicked it off with a mention of the phrase 'rat-fucking' and then went on to wind through Kevin Rudd's emotionally challenging childhood to come to the conclusion that what drives the Prime Minister is anger. This bit caught my eye:

"He doesn't trust his advisers to give advice, so they become glorified research assistants. Because everything is on the go at once and he's interrogating the detail of everything, nothing comes out until the last minute. Bringing work to a conclusion was focused around the next media hit. He loves an announcement.

"He is a strange beast behind closed doors. He is so focused on the day-to-day tasks that he loses the social niceties. They are neither here nor there. Staff are interrogated beyond what's reasonable to expect them to know. And if you don't know, the atmosphere changes. Not a blow-up. It becomes very quiet. But he doesn't deliberately push his staff to this point.

"For all the effort, he doesn't come up with particularly interesting solutions to problems. His policy positions aren't breakthroughs, not particularly new or exciting. After all that work, they are dull."

That above could possibly be accurate (or totally inaccurate). The problem is that it is not attributed to anybody, and it's a pretty damning opinion of the man's work at the end. In all honesty, I would hate to b damned by such hearsay, so even if it were true, the lack of attribution is a bit of an issue for me. This next bit of opinion spinning ad hominem stuff had me seriously wondering:

If Australia saw him through Canberra's eyes, he would be done for. Though he has led until now a formidably disciplined first-term government - few leaks, only one minister lost - negotiated the global banking crisis of 2008 with exemplary skill, pulled off the great symbolic coup of the Apology and routed two opposition leaders, the capital is tired of him.

He's seen in that little world of power as a weird guy and a failing prime minister. He puzzles his caucus, frustrates his ministers and irritates the press. A habit of making endless speeches at big public events has earned the man - known at various times in his career as Dr Death, Pixie and Heavy Kevvie - a new nickname: the Castro of the South Pacific.

Colleagues from his time as the key back-room boy in Goss's reforming government have an old joke they trot out whenever they meet to talk about those days of high hopes and disappointment. They don't remember him kindly. The joke: Rudd is a creature from outer space. The proof? Who but an android would say so often, "I am only human."

What's really worrying about this is that none of this concluding section of the account has any substance worth spit. Yet here are three paragraphs that are essentially bagging the guy in the name of reporting on how other people bag the man behind his back. It's hard to tell how this serves as journalism or serves political discourse in this country. David Marr went on to talk about his encounter with Rudd here. Kevin Rudd went ballistic at David Marr, and David Marr took that anger as proof that Kavin Rudd runs on anger.

Kevin Rudd's riposte this week was that it wasn't so much anger but incandescent rage that drives him. And that he has a long memory.

Now, I'm no Kevin Rudd fan. I understand he got voted in because of who he wasn't more than who he was. I preferred Mark Latham as leader of the ALP, and I don't really understand why Mr. Rudd likes making moralistic opinions on art be heard through his office as Prime Minister. The man is a joke when it comes to understanding the transgressive nature of good art. Even so, David Marr's article is as unfair on Rudd as Rudd was unfair on Bill Henson - and maybe that's why Marr did it - but I can't prove it. Whatever the case, it's a very misguided piece.

Then, there was Michael Cockrill is covering the World Cup over in South Africa, and after Australia's dismal loss to Germany, filed this article about Harry Kewell.

On Saturday (midnight, AEST), in Rustenburg, he gets the chance to prove he's got something left to give. At times in his career, Kewell has been a genuine star. And his long, arduous battle to keep his body together remains a tribute to his bravery, and resilience. But he's never been able to accept his diminished circumstances. Instead, he's chosen to deflect the scrutiny with hype. Kewell Inc is on the way up. Kewell, football player, is on the way down. And has been for years.

Now there is nowhere left to hide. If he's got any petrol left in the tank, he's got to show it, against Ghana. Preferably by starting the game, and finishing it. Preferably by providing a point of difference. Preferably by giving glimpses of the Harry of old. Anything less, and there's no more excuses. None.

If the Socceroos lose to the Black Stars, they're out of contention. With a new coach coming on board, there'll be a broom swept through a squad creaking at the joints. Believe it or not, Kewell is likely to be part of the clean out. A few years ago that was unthinkable. But a few years is a long time in football. 'Our Harry' knows that better than anyone.

Again, here's a bunch of statements about a man that has no attribution or evidence.

Now, you all know I hate soccer and Harry Kewell's stardom is neither here nor there for me, but it seems the guy has done more right for the cause of Australian Soccer than he has done wrong (or ill). He's been a stalwart, at the edge of his endurance at times. The characterisation here is that he's a prima donna who doesn't know he's washed up.

Naturally, Harry Kewell reacted with incandescent rage, and called out to Cockerill to show his face. Cockerill responded with this tart and nasty little article.

HERE I am Harry, where I was always going to be and where I'll be for the next few weeks. Covering the World Cup.

Not covering you, exclusively, I must admit. I like to get around. On Wednesday afternoon, when you seemed to be rather upset that I wasn't squeezed among the press pack at Ruimsig, tape recorder in hand, I was actually in Pretoria. Months ago I applied, and received, accreditation to report on South Africa's game against Uruguay. You can check if you like.

Perhaps if I'd known you were going to front the cameras - we're not generally told who Football Federation Australia are ''putting up'' in advance - I would have changed my plans. Come to think of it, no I wouldn't have.

You see, Harry, I spent a lot of years, a lot of energy and a lot of effort chasing you for quotes around the world. I was there when it all began for you in 1996 - in fact, I was there a long time before that - and I'm still here now.

Ninety per cent of that time, you've blanked me. The last time, four years ago in Yokohama, I made a decision there wasn't much point in the charade any more. Something I conveyed, quite clearly, to your manager, Bernie Mandic. So you got on with your life and I got on with mine. That's fair enough. There's plenty of athletes and plenty of journalists who don't get on. Nature of the beast and all that.

Except he wasn't there to take the anger (nay, incandescent rage) from Kewell. And he won't turn up to take his well-deserved beatings from the man. He's just talking tough from behind his keyboard, protected by the reputation of the Sydney morning Herald itself. Kewell's management issued a statement pointing out the actual errors in Cockerill's original article.Here's an example of one of the points rebuked and it's interesting:

Today you wrote that I told you, ''the football media was a joke, utterly irrelevant''. Again you are playing with the truth. Not only is the location of the conversation wrong but you have conveniently left out that I was speaking specifically about Australian newspaper journalists that cover soccer and quoted what Rupert Murdoch said about newspapers in general - ''Only 9 per cent [of the people] describe us as trustworthy, a scant 8 per cent find us useful, and only 4 per cent think we're entertaining (14 May, 2005).''

Yes, one does wonder about journalists, as does Harry's manager Bernard Mandic.

In both instances, one wonders why on earth the editor at the SMH thought either one of these character assassinations were worthy pieces of journalism to print, because in both instances the subsequent discussions have devolved into fierce rebukes and slanging matches. It's this kind of thing that's lowered my opinion of the SMH even more.

The Home Game

Australia beat Uruguay 1-0 and then 4-2 in the penalty shoot-out to advance to the World Cup. It will be Australia's first appearance at he World Cup since the magic year Progressive Rockers released their best albums - 1974. :)

I Hate Soccer
I don't know why I do. I don't hate it with a passion, just sort of don't want to embrace it because it would be like embracing a sweaty Latin American nutcase like Diego Maradona himself. They shoot players over results in this game in Columbia for a start. people have hooligan riots in Europe. Crazy people from Asia, Africa, North and South America, Europe, Oceania and Pacific Islands play this game. Even humourless Kazakhstanis play this game. It's a lot of people with fucked up mores to embrace.

Yes I understand the game does have greats and I have sneakily watched enough World Cups to have seen Diego Maradona and his hand of God as well as Ronaldo and Ronaldinho and the Brazillians in 2002. I guess there's always been a soccer-mad guy near me to help me watch it. I still can't explain my reluctance to actually follow this fine game.

It's really unnatural to a guy who likes hitting balls. you know, I played Tennis and Baseball and watched a lot of Cricket. hitting a moving ball effectively with an implement IS sport to me. :) Kicking a ball around is kind of counter-intuitive.
I also got traumatised in a Japanese primary school that was soccer mad. I hated the kids who liked it and played it. So childhood trauma is carried through. I've never felt like forgiving those kids, so I've hated their stupid sport ever since.

Then there's all that diving and holding their faces in expressions of pain. To a viewer who is used to watching things like spear tackles and rucks in other codes of football, they look like wimps. Not that I've ever been on the receiving end of any of those plays. I have taken pitches to the body and elbow and they frickin' hurt so it's not like I'm scared of pain on a sports ground. I'd sooner watch any code of football but Football itself if it came down to the choice of wire, and yet there it is.

Nonetheless Football is the genuine article 'world game'. The World Cup really means something. I'm led to believe there are more nations in FIFA than there are in the International Olympics Committee. There's no other sport like it when it comes to a global appeal. It makes most of the sports we come across as about as big as a tugboat next to a tanker.

- Aussie Rules is so parochial, the only international game it gets is in a mixed rule stoush with the Irish and recently we've been dominating their club level players with our professional athletes. It's really cruel and hardly sport.

- Rugby League is pretty much as parochial as Aussie Rules except it does have some kind of international competition stocked mostly by players from Australia. Their version of a World Cup is laughable.

- Rugby Union is probably the most legitimate of the three other footie codes to have World Cup. At least, the top 8 Nations are competitive with each other, but the next 16 are hardly worth spit.

- Cricket. The World Cup is essentially a showcase for the hardcore Test playing nations to stomp on such amateur minnows such as Kenya. There's a future in it, but it's decades away.

- Tennis. the Davis Cup is a very proud international competition where the best players often absent themselves because the pay's not good enough. The four nations where it actually means something to are UK, Australia, France and Sweden. The USA could win it, but nobody would care.

- Track and Field. The high point for track and filed will always be the Olympics. While I like the idea of the Olympics, in the last 5 or so Olympics I only ended up watching International baseball with any serious interest. Call me a philistine, but no matter how good they are, people chucking shot puts and javelins or jogging 43kms hasn't got half the appeal of Daisuke Matsuzaka squaring off against Jose Contreras in Sydney 2000.

- Now that I've mentioned it, Baseball, just for a comparison, I want to point out that the MLB is starting its own World Baseball Classic next year as a showcase of international talent. The top 8 nations will be pretty good compared to the International Cup which has featured a mixed bag of amateurs and professionals. but we don't know how seriously this is going to be contested so the proof will be in the pudding; but even then we're talking 12 nations maximum. It will be a more level playing field than th Cricket World Cup.

So by a quick process of elimination you can see that the World Cup, with its 32 nations selected from over 200 after an arduous qualifying rounds, really is THE world game. it really is something for the Australians to get through over two-time champions Uruguay where the only sport is Football.
And when I write that, it's still really, really begrudgingly. :)
I'd still rather watch...

Having Said All That... I Admit I'm A Fair Weather Fan


I was asked to read a book 'The Away Game' in the year preceding the last World Cup. The idea was I was going to direct a documentary about Australian soccer players who went overseas to make it by hook or crook. It was a heck of a good read, that overcame my above-mentioned resistance to the game. And while the documentary project fell apart as Australia failed to qualify the last time around, I remembered the names: John Aloisi, Mark Schwarzer, Harry Kewell, Mark Viduka Tony Vidmar.






Indeed I watched closely how they won the Oceania group and got knocked out by Uruguay in Montevideo 3-0, the last time around. This was the grudge match replay for Australia to end them all. If Australia can't beat the 5th best South American team, it's never going to be able to go to the World Cup; and even if it snuck through by other means it wouldn't necessarily mean the Socceroos 'made the grade'. So going through the 5th best South American team, no matter how crazy a prerequisite it seemed was important to the game's credibility in Australia. The last time we got beat by the Uruguayans, a Latin American friend of mine quipped "you guys had NO chance. They were two-time champions Uruguay."

I guess on one level, the level of tradition and accomplishment within the 32-team World Cup contest format, a team like the Socceroos must be something like AAA Columbus Clippers and Uruguay must be (at least) like The Philadelphia Phillies. Or we're Canada at the Commonwealth Games taking on one of the Test playing nations in Cricket.

To see them last night then, putting on such a spirited performance and winning, was a truly emotional experience.
It was the first time in 4 years that I sat down to actually watch these guys from wo to go, do their thing, together. I don't know why I've missed this so far; maybe the disappointment from last time was just too much and I shut them out of my mind. Having seen how they played last night, I'll tell you one thing, I now understand why people get passionate about this sport. It's a damn good game when it's played right. :)

A Special Note About Harry Kewell

I don't know how good he is on the whole, mostly because I'm not a soccer fan, nor do I understand the stats they keep. In fact I don't know if they are good stats or bad, or how he ranks amongst his playing peers in England. Well, Kewell was coming back from surgery and was not match fit, but the moment he came into the game, the complexion of the game altered. Three minutes later Bresciano scored that vital goal. So I figure he must be pretty darned good beyond all the fancy footwork he displayed.

URUGUAY'S coach, Jorge Fossati, said the night before the match that Australia did not have that one special player who could stop his team from qualifying for the World Cup.

Well, Jorge, it's a great delight to say you were incorrect. In fact, the Socceroos had more than enough special players. There were plenty of Australian heroes, but it was Harry Kewell who was mainly responsible for the momentum created during the second half which kept the Socceroos going into extra time, penalties and — finally — into the 2006 World Cup.

It was a five-star performance from the attacking man on the left, to go with a quality effort at the other end from sweeper Lucas Neill.

---
Kewell began driving Uruguay's right-side players mad from the time he came on in the 32nd minute, and while it was actually a muffed shot by him that rolled into Bresciano's path for the shot that made it 1-0, at least he had attracted defenders away.

It wasn't a case of Kewell growing in confidence. He began with enormous confidence and stayed at that level. He used all his savvy, too, and if there wasn't really anything on he intelligently attracted fouls and won Australia free kicks.

But it was when Kewell ran the ball down the left-hand side that he gave Uruguay repeated headaches. He crossed dangerously into the box in the 53rd, 57th and 60th minutes, but each time Uruguay managed to survive. Then he won a corner in the 64th to keep the pressure up.

A long-range shot with his non-preferred right foot in the 76th minute went well wide, but he was prepared to try again if it fell to his right and in the 81st minute another right-foot shot by him forced a desperate save from Uruguayan goalkeeper Fabian Carini.

Kewell's 86th-minute attempt to win a free kick had him justifiably booked for diving, but it was an understandable risk because he had broken away on the ball near halfway and defenders were closing in on him, while he didn't have any reachable support.

At least he stopped the play. Had one of the Uruguayans stolen the ball, they were in position to mount a counter-attack down the middle.

Kewell was also prepared to track back in defence, stopping dangerous Uruguayan moves just before half-time and again in the 52nd minute. Confrontations didn't bother him, either.

Fittingly, it was Kewell who got Australia off to the right start in the penalty shootout, striking the ball confidently and giving the goalkeeper no chance.

He gave his all right until the end. It was the big game and the big-game player.

Over the years the guy has received some pretty scathing attacks from Australian journalists about his commitment to play for Australia. Well, the guy I saw last night looked totally dedicated and willfull. I saw a guy who played right out at the edge of his ability, wanting to make things happen. I don't know where all that negative press came from, but Australia were really fortunate to have a player like Harry Kewell running around fro them last night, and he made all the difference.

That's Ostraya For You
30,000-40,000 turn up to protest against Industrial Relations Law changes in Sydney.
80,000 turn up to watch a game of sport.
If you don't believe we're getting the 'bread-and-circuses' treatment from our overlords, you'd better believe it, my fellow Romans. :)