Webdiary - Founded and Inspired by Margo Kingston |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
There are More Important Things than National Elections
Hamish Alcorn is a Director of Webdiary, and is the inspirational person who kept Webdiary going from late 2005 to mid 2006. He has been a source of great strength and comfort to all moderators over the past two years. Hamish's blog is here; this is his first piece for Webdiary this year (and about time too....). Great to see you in print again, Hamish.
Can anyone remember the hoopla about the Soccer World Cup? How it palpably gripped the imagination of our country that we were playing the international game at such an elite level? If the growth of soccer in Australia since is any indication it certainly had an impact. Soccer is even trendy in some circles. But then people seem all but unaware that the Women's World Cup is now on, that the Matildas are in it, and that they are brilliant.
Ok, it's a shame, and of course this is just the age old superiority of male physical sport, real or imagined. Inherent sexism in our society is an important reason to contemplate, perhaps, the extraordinary gap between national enthusiasm for the Socceroos and the Matildas, as is the spectacle of physicality. But it's not just like the gap between male and female tennis or swimming. It's a gaping chasm, and surely the marketing of the Matildas and the Women's World Cup for that matter, simply has to be partly to blame.
Here's a brief of who they are. The Matildas are fifteenth in the World, on a very international stage. 140 countries set out to qualify for Women's World Cup China 2007, and 16 got in. Let's recall that the Socceroos qualified for a finals of 32, so the Matildas are already ahead there. And by defeating Ghana 4:1 last week, and the drawing 1:1 with Norway, the Brazil of women's soccer, on Friday night, the Matildas are in with a fair speculator's chance of getting into the quarter finals, further than any Australian soccer team has got before. To do that they need a draw or a win against Canada, on Wednesday night. It's on SBS.
There is no real excuse for our country not getting behind these girls even for the most superficial reasons. This post is a plug, and some other possible reasons.
The official World ranking in women's football looks very different to the men's. The most coherent key to making sense of the required adjustment is that the women's ranking has a strong reflection of which countries have the most liberated women, by which I mean the extent to which women can choose their own lifeways. Apart from Brazil at number 8, there are no Latin American countries in the top 20, the USA and Norway battle for Number 1 (29th and 49th respectively in the men's), and Australia, an impressive enough 42nd in the men's, is 15th. Needless to say the Middle East doesn't get a look into the top 50 in women's soccer, though in the men's Israel, Egypt and Iran are all ahead of us.
There's a notable exception in my view, and that is North Korea, who recently knocked the Matildas out of their Olympic qualifiers and are certainly one of the favourites to win the Cup. Here's to caricatures and obscene generalisations, because I want to paint this picture properly. They look like a Stalinist machine. They have short hair, no femininity, very little expression of emotion, and are utterly, utterly brilliant. They are, if you like, Sparta, and as we know definitively from the movie 300, Sparta might be distasteful, but it can certainly mount a challenge in sheer effectiveness. The Matildas will not meet the North Koreans until the semi-finals at the earliest, if they get that far.
So perhaps this is a reason why women's soccer is not as significant a world event. It is not as universally a contest between populations (though you'd have to say it is still more so than any other team sport), as it is to a palpable extent layered by the extent to which the populations have women liberated enough to pursue soccer if they feel like it. Or perhaps this makes it a profoundly more important contest.
Like so many sports soccer began as a men's pursuit. But unlike many team sports in particular, soccer was and is very accessible. It's the same reason, if you like, why it's popular with juniors and why there's over-55 leagues that are still brilliant to watch.
Now I know it's Australians mostly who might read this, and I don't want to get into the stuff between different football codes in this country, all of which I respect and love to watch, but there are other reasons why soccer will not stop growing in popularity. There is the bodies and athleticism that we all love, there are some amazing skills and feats of strength and endurance, but more importantly there is that quality of an infinite world of possibility emerging from a simple set of rules, like chess as compared to backgammon, or bridge to 500. This quality does not really explain the growth of soccer around the world, but it explains its stickability, as cultures of meaning and analysis, along with an apparently infinite tapestry of metaphor for life, evolve around the game. Yes it's true of every sport to some extent, and as a fan I've got to avoid raving on about this, but there is a whole other exponent of possibilities in a soccer game. Expertly analyse a basketball game, cricket game, AFL game, rugby game. Sure there's plenty to say. But there is no comparison to the vistas of meaning available to the interested in a soccer game, at any level, whether playing or watching.
To explain the actual growth of soccer however, especially its tertiary stage of growth now in America, Australia and Asia, it's impossible not to refer to the accessibility of the sport to women. In both the USA and Australia the massive growth at junior level is girl-led to an enormous extent.
Soccer is not just accessible in that anyone can play at some level. That's true enough, but soccer's quality is accessible, to an enormous extent compared to other sports. In itself, physicality is largely taken out of the equation. Height and strength can both be useful in some positions and situations but as many a short, speedy player can attest, it is not the only thing. Hitting the ball really hard is very rarely a useful skill. It's hitting it at the right speed, accurately, that counts. Soccer aficionados regularly rue play which is too physical, too 'long-ball' and too much in the air, because they are interested in tactics and technical skill, in particular quick successive passing between players to weave a way through a shifting defence. In all this there's no difference between women's and men's soccer.
There's certainly a spectacle in highly physical games. The rugby codes attest to that on their own, but if you want to see some brilliant biff within the soccer code I recommend any game between Celtic and Rangers - great stuff and admittedly a brilliant spectacle in its own right. Meanwhile these girls are pretty tough and they don't hold back - don't get me wrong - but it is the level of raw toughness which provides the main difference in spectacle between women and men playing soccer. In soccer geek land there's arguments about whether women's soccer is as good to watch, and for me I've distilled the reasons to this. For those who love tactics and skill and the ballet of outwitting opponents on and off the ball, there is no difference in the spectacle. Ok, possibly one difference. As a generalisation, women seem to be better team players, they hog the ball less, and appear to intuit better what other players are doing and thinking. But then again, that may just be an observation brought on by the fact that the Matildas are actually brilliant. Any brilliant team looks like this.
An important overall point which must be made is that women's soccer has by no means matured. As I've indicated, women's soccer appears to have success to the extent that women feel liberated to do what they like. I simply have no idea whether women - in a theoretically completely liberated state - would want to play football less or as much as men, and I'm making no sweeping sociological statements about that. It would appear though from current trends that there's still a lot of growth to be seen. And these games are extremely high quality. Let's not even think about the extent to which the gap in quality would close if women had access to the same level of professionalism, coaching, facilities and support that men's soccer players do. Because elite women's soccer is already a comparable spectacle. The point is we don't even really know how equivalent the spectacle can be.
The Matildas are not just good. They are clearly special. As players and personalities, and as a team, they have that bit of magic which compels one to believe in them. They are the most brilliant role-models for our young girls, and perfect icons for Australian patriotism and pride. And I don't particularly blame the Australian people for not being more passionately behind them. Clearly their marketing has failed them because they are about the most marketable product in the country. They are young, beautiful, sexy, talented, committed and Australian. Their personalities and obvious team magic are inspiring. They are doing well on the highest stage available, and don't look like they've peaked.
They are playing Canada in their final group match for the FIFA Women's World Cup China 2007 on Wednesday night. It's live on SBS, from 6.50pm. They're our girls and they're brilliant. Go the Matildas.
 |
|
 |
 |
| © 2005-2011, Webdiary Pty Ltd |
| Disclaimer: | This site is home to many debates, and the views expressed on this site are not necessarily those of the site editors. Contributors submit comments on their own responsibility: if you believe that a comment is incorrect or offensive in any way, please submit a comment to that effect and we will make corrections or deletions as necessary. |
what's all this mobile wrestling
What's wrong wth all you turkeys?
The only place to be today was at Adelaide's AMI stadium with thirty thousand others of the true faith watching Central District, the remarkable and fearsome SANFL Bulldogs, in their eighth consecutive grand final winning their sixth premiership of this, or any other century!
You could have been like the vanquished North Adelaide fans sitting in front of yours truly, subject to the observant wit and keen repartee delivered sotto voce of selfsame, concerning the parallel abilities of the thoroughly plucked Roosters and the umpires ( the people you lot call "referees"! ).
As one witty young fan of the female persuasion remarked tunefully on departure from the stadium deserted long since by half of the crowd; "chicken tonite, chicken tonite"!
What a day ya missed.
Australians hopeles at sport. Should get an edcation.
Boring
I watched the Pom's flog the dithering Wallabies, you could see from the start they were complacent, had a game plan which didn't work and failed to change it. I should have gone to bed, my dreams would have been so much better and more fruitful. Then I get up this morning to see the Kiwi's get beaten, at least that made me feel a bit better.
I really preferred watching the Matilda's get beaten, at least they never gave up, trying everything they could to change the outcome and almost succeeding. The women's Germans/Brazil match was again one of the best games of soccer I've ever watched, it's so pleasant to watch those whose aim is to win, rather than play act, which 95% of the men do. No wonder they have so much violence at men's soccer, it's the most boring spectacle on earth and the fans being as brain dead as they are, act that way. I hope SBS televises every game the Matilda's play as well as their up coming national competition, at least we would see games of skill and not parody upon parody.
Meanwhile, at the Rugby (fnah, fnah) ...
Yesterday's previews (fairly unanimously): "so, there is a real prospect that there will be no northern hemisphere teams in the semis, let alone the final ..."
Well, this is where the old Tebbitt "cricket test" reveals the relative strength of my two passports ... England 12, Australia 10: ha ha ha ha ha, Eng-er-land! Eng-er-land! ; France 20, New Zealand 18: Allez les bleus!
PS: anyone want to bet against Fiji-Scotland for teh other semi?
Margo: Lesson - we'd better get with the strength and ratify Kyoto!
eating crow,frogs and kicking poodles
I bleu my Nee a les meat boilers. And fizzle to that frog lot.
(Most people think that field goals are ruining the game. Too many points for too little effort and skill. Local club rugby has little of that in the game, yet Johnny Wilkinson shows repeatedly that using that wins. Perhaps we should call the English team AFL., non?)
You are like mon mari in the passport and annoying little 'abit of 'aving teams that win and then beaucoup des coq a ddodle doo about it. I am gullet sick of zee emails from over there from him. tartantara. oui, tu as frappe un nerve. grrrr. I shall kick a poodle, mais perhaps not a bulldog.
I bet on Argentina. blah.
'Ave your little crow, zee zummmer is starting.
Eh , Margo, that Kyoto has just had a huge co2 push up. have you seen the size of those guys running around? Kyoto, no Rugby. More likely than no Le Mans. Actually when you think about it, most of these sports events chew up a lot of co2. Especially producing the steam from ears.
I hera the Brits import 20 tonnes of bottled water from Aussi and we import 20 tonnes of bottled water from the Brits. Go figure.There is a certain madness to Capitalism that you have to love, when one has the luxury to do so.
Epilogue
Germany 2 Brazil 0 in a stunning denouement. Strikingly similar to Brazil- Germany clashes in men's soccer, where Brazilian flair tangles with German order. This time order outlasted flair, but what a match!
Farewell to the Beautiful Women of the Beautiful Game, for now
What a match indeed. There were a fair few errors on both sides to be honest, and Brazil's overconfidence, especially in defense where they were far too cocky, cost them in the end. But the skill being showed across the park was a treat for any soccer aficionado. Beautiful, inspiring stuff.
I was going for Brazil, but the better team won. I'm going to miss the Women's World Cup. It was fantastic.
Female Bishops, God must be smiling today.
Common sense has prevailed in the Anglican Church. I wonder if the Catholics will ever see the light.
Evolution
Stems from their recent decison to recognise women as human, or "persons". Can you believe it?
Chicks Rule
I penned this elsewhere for a football audience, but I'm pasting it here too.
Chicks Rule
If you missed the WWC game between Brazil and USA last night, well... I'm truly sorry for you. Brazil's effort was possibly the pinnacle to date of a woman's soccer team.
Fozzie's stunned, almost hypnotised reaction, said it all. After the first half he said it was the best women's soccer he'd ever seen. After the game he said it was the best football game (of any type) he'd seen for a long time. It was certainly the best I've seen for a long time, and I will remember it, and especially the fourth goal of Marta's, for a long, long time. If you love watching Ronaldinho at his most magical, then don't miss Marta. She is a genius, and gives us I think a glimpse of what women's football can actually get to.
DON'T MISS the grand final on Sunday night between Germany and Brazil. It might just be the best quality, most entertaining, attacking football, you'll see for a long time. If the quality keeps improving, and the girls continue an apparent trend of playing to score goals without much cynical play, then frankly I prefer women's football to men's, by a pretty chunky margin. You might not agree with me, but I predict that many more people will agree with me than before last night.
Meanwhile FIFA President Sepp Blatter has announced that the required 10% of funding to women's soccer from national federations is to be increased to 20%. Let's just say we have by no means seen the full extent of what is possible in women's soccer.
As for the Queensland Roar's difficulty with strikers, well I reckon we should import one more Brazilian. Marta would clean up any A-League defence, and I would just LOVE to be proved wrong.
Howard has under funded hospitals in favour of private health
It is a disgrace when an Australian baby is born in a toilet, in a public hospital. Howard's health policy is a shambles.
Football and elections
There is something strange in Howard's response about the election, which I missed the first time I heard it.
From the Daily Telegraph:
It is as if by losing an election he would cease to exist and cease to be capable of attending a football match, or, that he would cease to have any reason to do so. It is not secret that Howard associates sport with propaganda but never has it been given so strange an expression as this.
Richard: For some reason I was under the impression that grand final(s) weekend was politically sacrosanct. Can anyone clarify?
I Believe that Howard has used it so Richard.
I am a little surprised actually that Howard is not calling an election close to the ultimate sports events such as this weekend.
I was always under the impression that he used times of public euphoria (like the Roman Emperors he so admires attending the Colosseum).
One of his and Costello's friends Kruger even suggested that Howard may call the election close to Christmas. Fair dinkum.
However, he can attend those events while in caretaker mode but, he would be afraid that he would not receive the centre stage that he believes he is entitled to.
Or worse, he may have to share the spotlight with Kevin Rudd. Heaven forbid!
I hope both codes scrub his egotistical butt.
Cheers, Richard,
Ern G.
Better than the blokes
The Matildas performed brilliantly last night, only their lack of international competition experience saw them falter. I reckon they deserve a big reception when they return home and recognised as the best soccer team this country has ever produced. One thing I enjoyed with watching the women play, was the lack of theatrics common within the men's game, no diving and whining just go for it. I also think they got some raw deals from the German ref (pretty apt considering the tone of posts in this thread), didn't lots of Germans flee to Brazil after WW2. That explains the refereeing for me.
The Matildas showed what a bunch of wimps the blokes are, they just played their hearts out and from a male point of view, some very nice hearts too. I was disappointed they lacked one essential I see for women's soccer, ripping off their shirts at the end of a winning game or goal - it almost looked like the Brazilian lady was trying work out whether to do it or not, when she scored the last goal. Time to put the Matildas and all women's sport where it belongs: equal coverage with the men in media, support and recognition. Go the girls.
epilogue
Similar result tonight to the men in Germany. Down, also down in a blaze of glory to a world powerhouse of the code, this time Brazil: Brazil 3, Matildas 2.
Got discouraged and left it for a walk with the dog, but got back in time watch watch Alagich painfully close to equalising in the dying minutes. Typical Brazil, almost goaled themselves a couple of minutes later!
A big topic of conversation at the start of the telecast was the lack of money for the women and how the Matildas had paid their own way, working two and three jobs to achieve this. Makes you wonder how far they could have got with a bit of help.
Notice the Fuhrer has got a guernsey in the thread. Was brought up on those docos with him in the grandstand, rocking away, backward and forward, while the likes of Owens and the Norwegians showed up his cranky theories and bad sportsmanship.
Wasn't Max Schmeling drafted to the Wermacht for losing his world boxing title to Joe Louis, also? Apparently Goebells pulled the broadcast plug after Schmeling took a big hit, but many years later, after the war, Louis and Schmeling themselves became friends of sorts. Shows the relative brains of boxers and politicians?
Which further reminds me of a photo I saw, I think at a public lecture recently by Simon Blackburn, of Hitler as a kid in class. Within a few feet of him, in the next row, was another boy, later renowned as one of the genuine great minds of the twentieth century, the philosopher and (later) refugee, Ludwig Wittgenstein.
Naturals
One point Indigenous art curator at the Art Gallery of NSW Hetti Perkins made when interviewing Anthony Mundine earlier this year was that Indigenous people are often described as being "naturals". It is a subtle kind of racism. No elite athlete is a "natural", they arrive at their success through intensive training.
God bless Cathy Freeman, too, for carrying the Indigenous flag and the Australian flag in her victory laps. Sad that in a way, like Owens, she was running against racism too. Strange recalling Midnight Oil with their "Sorry" T-Shirts, aimed directly at our Prime Minister's eyes.
Sport is one area where black people have had a shot at success in societies where other avenues are cut off. I won't forget the depictions of black people in violent boxing spectacles depicted in Ellison and Baldwin, and the humiliation it involved. In Tell me how long the train has been gone Baldwin writes of the power of celebrity, through acting, which gave some black people a kind of immunity from racism reserved for common blacks. I think there is some of that there in our society, with performing arts and Indigenous cultural production being one area with strong backing by those in the industries. Much of our cultural export, especially in film, revolves around Indigenous culture. This is a good thing but I wonder how far it penetrates through to attitudes about ordinary Indigenous people.
'Naturals' and racism
Solomon: 'Racism' is a word bandied about these days so freely it is rapidly losing its distinctive and valuable meaning. First, in order for there to be any 'racism' at all, we have to acknowledge the existence of distinct human races. But here's contadiction #1. It is unfashionable and not PC these days to even acknowledge the existence of 'races'. A synonym is preferred: 'ethnicity'. It means exactly the same thing, but will open a lot more doors.
The 19th Century anthropologists recognised four major racial categories: Caucasoids, Negroids, Mongoloids and Australoids, based on inherited difference in physical characteristics. These, I maintain, are useful but not watertight categories, even though the very mention of them calls forth the vocal reflex 'racism!' in some quarters.
Racism traditionally means a bald assertion that the members of one race are superior to others in important ways. For Hitler and his acolytes, it was by assertion and pseudo-scientific argument that one sub-group of the Caucasoids, the Semitic peoples of Jewish affilitation (as distinct from the Semitic peoples of non-Jewish affiliation, eg Arabs) were inferior to another sub-group of the Caucasoids, the northern-European 'aryans'. Ironically, Hitler in his writings seems to have defined himself out of the latter category.
The late and great Professor Fred Hollows used to proudly proclaim that he himself was a racist, in that he believed on the basis of his own research in opthalmology that Australia's Aborigines had the most acute vision of any people on Earth. That we might term 'soft' racism, in that it was proclaiming the innate superiority of an oppressed people, as contrasted with the Hitler variant. But it was still racism, which proves that some racist statements can be soundly based, and not carry any overtones of right to privileged position.
It would indeed be surprising if the long evolution of the human species and its divergence into at least four separate races did not produce differences in physiology and various 'natural' abilities. I would not expect the average forest pygmy man to beat a man of nilotic extraction (the latter category being very tall) in a foot race, unless that race was run through an African rain forest. Then my money would be on the pygmy, provided I could find a bookmaker stupid enough to take the bet.
Jesse Owens
The success of African-American Jesse Owens in the '36 Olympics undermined Hitler's propaganda machine. Apparently the alleged refusal Hitler to shake his hand never actually happened, but this is inessential, he didn't have to. In 1951, I learn, Owen praised his German rival Lutz:
And on the slight by Hitler:
I don't agree and think an apathy towards truth is not beneficial, but nevertheless the preconditions for such an event and attitude were true and it is worthwhile that we learn of this.
In his post-Olympic career I learn he developed his own public relations firm and devoted a lot of time towards youth work. The latter seems natural but the former is remarkable for a black man from his era. This is a piece of history that I think would be beneficial for our Foreign Affairs minister to learn, before he next attacks the discipline of public relations.
Football And Fascism
I like sport. Its precision, immediacy, defined time and space, skill, heroism and grace are not a bad antidote to a grubby, treacherous world and unknown, scary universe. Which I guess is what makes it such a handy tool for tyrants to pick up and bash the public senseless. More a club than an opiate for the masses. And which can be wielded by tyrants and cowards alike.
Take a look at this photo.
The venue is the Olympic Stadium in Berlin and the date is 14 May 1938. That's England's national side on the left presenting the crowd with a Nazi salute during the pre-match ceremony. And for what it is worth this is the "Beautiful Game's" lowest point.
This event had little to do with sport and much to do with the politics of appeasement. Here is Chamberlain's Government signalling to Berlin by proxy that England would not rescue the Czechs from Hitler and giving Hitler cause to believe that he would have a free hand in the East.
Hitler's contempt for the English was so complete he didn't even bother to show up to take the salute.
Hitler and Football
Indeed Geoff. According to David Goldblatt's account of German football during the Reich (The Ball is Round - A Global History of Football, 2006), Hitler didn't even like football:
He recognised both the political utility of international sport, the emotional potency of the spectacular and the economic and military virtues of the sporting, healthy nation, but he played no sport himself and only showed any enthusiasm for boxing and motor racing.
He was apparently convinced to go to one game ever - along with his entire cabinet - because Germany was certain to win. It was the same 1936 Olympic games in fact, and Germany had just beaten Luxembourg 9-0. Norway was considered a rank outsider at the time. Norway won 2:0 and Hitler left after the second goal. You can feel the excrutiation of the moment in Goebbel's notes (as quoted by Goldblatt):
'... the Fuhrer is very agitated. I am almost unable to control myself. A real bath of nerves. The crowd rages. A battle like never before. The game as mass suggestion.'
No point, just a bit o' fun
No point, really Fiona. Just kickin' back, havin' a bit of a stir on a Saturday night. (it's what I do best )
Like you , am not into sport.('cept AFL footy) And much prefer music art and literature
Coq au vin sounds wonderful. Can I book you for next Saturday night? [What's the going rate??]
You certainly have many strings to your bow!
Cheers
Fiona: And to you too, Kathy.
Bloodlust
Five goals to twenty. Poor old Kangaroos were playing against a staudium of Adelaideans. Good fun.
Fiona: So good you posted it twice, Richard! Never mind, next week I hope the Cats will put you out of your misery. Miaow!
(Disclaimer: Don't barrack for Geelong - but I have several friends who are lifelong supporters, and it's been a long long time ... and Port did have a premiership not so long ago.)
Sorry Rich.
Sorry, Richard, I'm with Fiona.
Hope poor old Geelong win the Grand Final, it's been a long time between drinks. As Fiona said, you guys got "a premiership not so long ago!" I'm only glad that Collingwood bit the dust!
( Disclaimer: I am an Eagles supporter, lamenting the fact that we have lost one of the game's greatest players, and gentlemen, Chris Judd. He has sexy eyes too.. sighs..)
The Importance of Being
Kathy, I’m a card-carrying, red-blooded, feisty, voluptuous, sensual, heterosexual woman. I’m also rather good at cryptic crosswords, Scrabble, backgammon, chess, and sudoku.
Not particularly keen on sport – music, literature, and drama are my preference – but I jes’ lerve giving Hamish a bit of lip…
Oh, I’m also a bloody good cook (having just made my second-best-ever coq au vin … ok, guys, safe to come out now….)
Your point is….? ( ;) )
In all seriousness
Hamish, apologies for such frivolity on your lovely thread.
Nevertheless, the banter regarding shirt removal etc etc is not entirely irrelevant. Does anyone else remember how, less than ten years ago, the Matildas decided to pose nude for a calendar in order to raise money to keep them going as a team?
Personally, I deplore the amount of (taxpayer) money thrown at sport in Australia, when so many other areas of excellence are neglected. Nevertheless, if we are as a nation determined to idolise our sporting heroes, surely the money should be distributed in a more equitable manner. And - again in the interests of equity - wouldn't mind a few calendars of nude male sporting stars...
'Egalite' in calendars
Fiona Reynolds: And - again in the interests of equity - wouldn't mind a few calendars of nude male sporting stars...
The Dieux du Stade ('Gods of the Stadium') calendar of the French men's rugby team always sells out - see the 2007 and 2008 covers (both SFW - just) for a taste of what could be...
Part the third
Dylan, interesting. However, my mind kept drifting to the "fraternité" part of the motto.
Nevertheless, I suppose that eye-candy is always eye-candy.
Fiona!
Fiona! You saucy little minx you! Who'd of thought, eh? There's life in the old girl yet! (chuckles).
Personally, I prefer a nice bottom in a pair of tight jeans. And I'm a sucker for sexy brooding eyes.
PS Dylan, the ball and chain pic was a bit of a turn off for me.
Last one
Fiona, just one more to make you smile.
Kevin Rudd was walking along the river bank in Brisbane, when he slipped and fell into the water. Three young boys dived in and dragged him to dry land. Kevin was so pleased that he told them he would give them whatever they wanted.
The first one said he would like an Xbox. Rudd said, “Done”.
The second one said he would like a Cowboys jumper. Rudd said, “Done and I will get all the players to sign it.”
The third one said, “I would like an electric wheelchair with a built-in laptop and Ipod.”
Rudd said, “Why do want a wheelchair? You don’t look handicapped”
To which the boy replied, “I will be when my Dad finds out what happened.”
Fiona: Thank you, Alan, it did. One of the hallmarks of maturity, in my opinion, is the ability to tell a joke, and to listen to the telling of a joke, against one’s own “side”. Which, in this instance I suspect, goes for both of us.
You've got to laugh.
Fiona, if you cannot laugh at life and the things it throws at you, you might as well be dead.
I suspect things are going to get pretty torrid in the weeks to come on WD. Can I humbly suggest we all inject a bit of humour once a weeK? After all, it does not matter who wins the election - we are all going to get screwed by the pollies.
Glad I could bring a smile to your face.
Sorry for my part.
I apologise for my part in this, Fiona, but I thought there was a wee bit too much pussyfooting about.
As to JA, good thing he pursued tennis and not pugilism as he didn't have much of a straight right. No not me. I was close by. But he was just a schoolboy at the time.
As to the other person you alluded to, I had no interest in his shorts. Nor members of the gourd family in any other than a culinary sense.
I can resist anything except...
Oh dear, Alan, Paul, and Bob, if we are really getting down and dirty, maybe now is the time for a bit of cross-code and cross-sport confession.
I still remember the days when I ... er, um ... contemplated Warwick Capper's cute ... short shorts. Not to mention my admiration for John Alexander's (tennis, not Channel 9) pulchritudinous legs...
But Brazilians? Only one response possible: ouch.
Brazilians
Fiona, did you hear about the time an Aide told G.W. Bush that two Brazilian troops had been killed in Iraq. He paused for a while then asked, "How many is a Brazilian?"
Fiona: Enough already, Alan, I'm giggling far too much to be able to type straight...
Ok Ok and thanks
Well, it's all become much more fun again and thank you everyone. And please don't take offense, Ernest. I do agree with Fiona that there's heaps of better places to wax lyrical about how bad Howard is, or the opposite in response.
Now, for the boys. If you really want to see some experimentation with women's soccer uniforms, go to the second link provided by The Flying Bats (above). Click on 'View all blog entries" (down the page a bit on the right). You'll find what I'm talking about. Make sure your children are not in the room.
How do we check?
Given the tone this thread has taken, I now pose the following question:
As the Matildas' next opponent is Brazil, how can we determine whether they will, in fact, be playing genuine Brazilians?
Bugger the soccer, go Port Adelaide
Jenny, I agree that we should be tougher on people who don't stick with the line of conversation. Having said that, I'm off to the Footy. You know the variety, the one where every one chases around a ball that was invented by Irish sadists. Have never been to an AFL final, would never have spent money on a ticket, but won't say no to one being waved in my face.
I watched the Matildas on Wednesday, and will do so again tomorrow. I must admit, I spent a bit of time wondering if a female player's, um, extra assets could be utilised for better passing skills. There were a couple of blocking moves in that game that looked potentially quite painful.
Alright, I'm off to watch the Big Men Fly.
A fierce lot down the port
Hey, Richard, half your luck . They are a ferocious one-eyed mob down there, aren't they?
Should be a fascinating match...
I understand Paramatta play Manly in the NSW version of winter sport. Who are the bad guys and the good with this, for the benefit of us further south?
Shirts off?
Richard Tonkin, it would be a nice touch if they could pull their shirts over their heads when they score a goal, or even take them off and wave them like the men do.
The Matildas are very good but they have a few things to learn yet!
a meeting of minds- shirts off
Amazing you said that, Alan. Remember being struck by the fact that the Matildas and another lot didn't swap shirts at the end of a match, which is what soccer players usually do at the end of a big soccer match.
Would say more, but Fiona is probably watching.
Fiona: Indeed I am, Paul, but you can keep your hat on...
People uninterested in engaging
Can't you? Must you?
Hamish, I think (as I suspect you do, too) that this thread would be far more interesting if those who want to publish their views/feelings on the forthcoming election did so on other, more appropriate, threads.
But - as for not wanting to engage - I was delighted to learn of the Matildas' famous draw. As was pointed out on the ABC, they have gone further in World Cup terms than any Oz football (properly defined) team before them.
I'm not an aficionado of any sport other than cricket (despite the dubious associates that I have in that field). Nonetheless, I do enjoy watching excellence in almost any domain, and particularly in those who do it despite the drawbacks of lack of money and public acknowledgement.
Oh dear, that sounds so stuffy. Not meant as such, but I'm tired (but not emotional); it's been a long, hard week.
So - yet again, go Matildas.
And - Hamish - to misquote Spooner, must you go? can't you stay?
Shove off or should that be kick off?
Now Hamish, if engagement means show one's face, then one here is guilty. Not posting much these days due to lots of family health issues, but here in spirit. But I agree totally with Fiona. All this political stuff has no place on this thread and frankly I think the editors could exercise their discretion on this issue.
There is a difference when threads are like the Channel country, where the main rivers can have many little streams trickling in to join the main flow, compared with those threads where the flow of the river is deliberately diverted (for fun?) where it was never meant to flow.
One does not want threads to be totally on topic all the time, but like the old Israel/Palestine issue last year, the Howard/Rudd and election issues tend to drown threads on which they have little or no relevance.
But all that aside, I for one have been following the Matildas much more after your piece, though I had been aware of how well they were doing. Mind you I am no football fan and cannot stand watching any football game, male or female. But I do love to watch the wome's cricket - when it is shown, that is!
I have thought for a long time now that many girls teams do not get nearly as much exposure and credit for their triumphs than the male teams but I think that is changing. The netballers have put women firmly on the team sports map, much more than the mens' team in that type of sport, and I always scan the audience with satisfaction to see many many males there applauding. They cannot all be family supporters. Similarly the Hokeyroos are much better known than the what's their name male hockey team and have done so much better.
The womens' cricket team is also way up there in the rankings though I think women's cricket will find it difficult to ever match the male teams in terms of public interest. Pity, but in a way there are some sports that even to me, (though I'd love to play cricket myself), somehow have a special place in our national psyche as the province of the men rather than the women.
Of course the female swimmers have well and truly stolen the limelight from their male counterparts and it is good to see the men on their feet cheering them.
Cheers Hamish, so nice to see you around. Makes a nice change from the usual thread, believe me.
So now, all of you not interested in the topic of this thread should just shove off, (said nicely) or should that be kick off. Be fair, you get a good run on other threads for your political views.
Great goals
Make a choice that Howard would like to "dismiss".
Isn't it logical that the Australian Labor Party would want the election to be held as soon as possible?
I also believe that the Australian voters feel the same way, if only to get the thing over and done with. John Howard's power makes us wait at his pleasure?
But - indications are that those same people have become fed up with Howard's lies and deceptions along with his intentions to enforce Fascism in our country under the Anti-Terrorism laws.
Make no mistake, Barnaby Joyce parades a personal opinion when, in fact, he does as he is told.
The Howard "New Order" are saying that they are rock solid and iron clad behind their spiteful little schoolboy - is that why the "team" gives the unilateral right to their Leader to make the election date decision?
"A vote for the coalition is a vote for Howard".
"A vote for Howard is a vote for the coalition".
"A vote for the Australian Democrats; Greens; Independents or the Australian Labor Party - is a vote against fascism!
Keep our eyes on the ball.
Bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.
Bush/Howard or Howard/Bush? Where is Australia?
Let's get things straight on the facts of the U.S/Australia alliance.
This alliance, like all others concerned with peace, was commenced by the Australian Labor Party under Prime Minister John Curtin.
The alliance was built on partnership, irrespective of the massive differences in the size of the two nations and considering the value of the geography.
This partnership was maintained with mutual respect by all governments after John Curtin, both Liberal and Labor.
The previous Liberal Prime Minister, Malcolm Fraser, has bitterly criticised the Howard government for its slavish attitude to the Bush regime and the inevitable patronising in return.
To most of the western world, Howard is a Bush puppet, simpering to George W. Bush on every matter of foreign policy and begging that regime to help him in the election of 2004 and again now.
So let's have a little reasoning.......
Howard says George Bush Jnr. is his good friend.
George Bush Jnr. says John Howard is his good friend.
So - does Howard follow Bush, step by step, illegal war after illegal war, occupation by occupation of sovereign nations - because of the alliance between the United States of America and Australia?
If so, why is he the only Australian Prime Minister since John Curtin's alliance began to interfere in the US Presidential election and their selection processes and. to make it worse, favouring one side against the other?
So, consider his actions if he claims to foster the alliance per se.
Why did he denigrate the very popular Democrat Presidential candidate Barak Obama? And link him with Osama bin Laden?
Why, even though he doesn't believe in climate change (and still doesn't) did he call Al Gore, the world campaigner against climate change, "a peeved politician"?
Why does he blindly follow the Bush regime's foreign policy?
Why does he allow Dick Cheney's Halliburton to build a nuclear railroad in Australia?
Why does he want US commercial interests to decide where to build nuclear reactors in Australia?
Why does he "invade" the Northern Territory Aboriginal settlements, remove their permit rights, their welfare payments, their Racial Discrimination Act and their independence? For US Uranium mining?
And so the obvious reason is - Bush and Howard are "good friends".
The alliance between our two countries has been bastardised by these two arrogant friends and our nation will always be subject to that relationship as long as Howard and his "New Order" are in power.
We have been led into a situation by this friendship where we are a greater target of anti-American terrorists; more subject to US troops occupying large areas of our Island/continent; being the Southern Anchor of the "Son of Star Wars" protective shield and generally becoming a front line objective for the defence of America.
I would like to see the Australian people elect a government, of whoever, except the Liberal/Nationalists led by a Bush puppet, rather than continue to witness the nation become just another fascist state, like those that our men and women have fought and died to oppose.
I remember, often, the warning of Alison Broinowski in her A Fascist Australia.
And I see it happening.
The choice at the election includes this:
I believe we have only one choice to save our nation from becoming a target for the enemies of the Bush regime.
Bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.
Fiona: Ern, while I respect your views, perhaps it would be pleasant if you (and all Webdiarists) kept this thread for the pleasure of rejoicing in the Matildas. There are lots of other threads presently running on Webdiary where comments on this and associated topics would IMHO be more appropriately posted.
Do the Australian People want an Election Now?
Shades of 2001 and 2004, the media is slowly but surely taking up the cudgels for the Howard "New Order".
Ever since the strange Newspoll which gave the Australian Labor Party a massive 18% lead, the airwaves, TV and the internet have been almost totally giving free coverage to all of the Liberal and Nationalist most identifiable dirt spinners.
They are of course, Howard; Costello, Abbott; Downer and Hockey. I have always had the feeling that those people protesteth too much and lessen their credibility accordingly.
Fancy bitchy Downer claiming that if Mr. Rudd wants to debate Mr.Howard, he should do so in Parliament! Fair dinkum. That's the only place that Howard can rant and rave with impunity and the Opposition are quickly shut up by Howard's speaker.
Howard has "never ever" won a one on one debate, even when he has chosen the adjudicator (Malcolm Farr once) and the issues to be debated.
While we are aware that some time ago it was reported that Mr. Ruddock, the "New Order" Attorney-General, had organised a dirt digging unit to operate during the election campaign. Yet strangely in Parliament when this was debated, Mr. Ruddock was silent.
This was not, at that time, denied convincingly; in fact it was reported that Tony Abbott agreed that there was indeed such a unit.
Yet, who is better place to spy on Kevin Rudd's medical files through ASIO or the AFP? This also applies to all of us even as Howard's "New Order" changes the laws to spy on our internet usage.
So why would Malcolm Farr of the Dairly Smellygraph concern himself entirely with trashing the argument put forward by Kevin Rudd and others that such a unit was functioning?
Why would Laurie Oakes confirm that he approached Kevin Rudd about his operation, stating that information came from an "anti-Labor" person? Are the Howard trained monkeys claiming he lied too?
And if not - then the anti-Labor person could also be a parliamentarian? The "New Order" venal media claims that that cannot be so - what crap!
And while we await the election consideration by the power-mad John Howard, why does the senior Liberals state that only he is to make that decision? And in his own good time!
What the heck has happened to the Howard/Costello "Team"?
There is only one thing that the public should bear in mind during the campaign and the poll day, and that is that all of Howard's Liberal and Nationalist MPs are as guilty as him for the lies and total unaccountability in respect to those lies.
Check with the Senate vote on Bob Brown's Accountability and Transparency Bill and you will find that every single member of that fascist upper House voted against it!!!
As of course, did the "New Order" in the House of Representatives.
Don't allow ourselves to be confused by the lies, just keep our eyes on the ball.
Then we have a good chance of preventing total fascism in our nation.
Bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.
Richard: The concern of misusing our intelligence for political purposes is a very valid one, Ernest, especially today as Scott Parkin's case returns to court.
Laughable
Ernest William, you really are a very funny man, except you don't know whether you are coming or going. "Ever since the strange Newspoll which gave the Australian Labor Party a massive 18% lead", when this happened you never complained about the venal media bagging the Coalition. The reason the the media are supporting the Libs/Nationals is that they have already seen through the sham and con that is Rudd. I agree with you however that Howard never wins a TV debate, but he does win the big one (the election) and that's what it is all about. Even Bob Brown now wants a debate, what a farce that would be. Whenever he stands up in the House to speak and the cameras pan round, every seat is empty senators have run away, he is the most boring person in the land.
As for "a dirt digging unit" ask your union friends about theirs, they are past masters in the art. That and their penchant for destroying property and beating up their members who disagree with them.
By all means keep your eyes on the ball, but use your right eye now and again.
Paper boats
The Matildas have made it to the semis, showing they are a world class football team. If only they could get their finishes right, they would have a real chance of making and winning the final. I reckon they have better ball skills that most of the blokes running round in the elite competitions around the world. Their ability to move the ball with such consistent attacking accuracy, hopefully will wake up the country, giving them the standing they deserve, top world class and a credit to themselves and the country.
Yes, there are more things than the election. Sadly those primitively enslaved to the current ideological fiasco are just clutching at straws as their fictional ideology paper boat sinks beneath the waves of failure, eminently displayed by all sides of unevolved political and religious ideology. Ernest and Alan typically are factional fighting. We see this in all ideologies, most particularly monotheism, which our current politics are heavily associated with and fervently embracing. When will people wake up and change direction, ridding us of this ideological insanity, called economic political religiosity?
A challenge to ideologists, provide some meaningful directional outcomes for our country’s future, instead of advocating more of the chaotic insanity represented by the lib/lab coalition and its minor offshoots. You can put forward all the rhetoric, propaganda and delusions you like, but reality and the future is not a head trip, it's life in glaring fact. Something the vast majority of the human race is either scared of, or too programmed and egocentric to accept. We see the results of this delusional approach, in our rapidly collapsing ecology and social fabric. Sadly, Ernest and Alan, with lib or lab in control disaster is assured. Go the Matildas.
Politics is Also Perception.
In their efforts to dictate the agenda in the run-up to the election campaigns proper the Howard "New Order" seek to lessen the limelight on their WorkChoices; Anti-Terrorist laws and Sedition.
I believe that there is a significant number of our people who are now in a position where their families; incomes and homes are under threat due mostly to two undeniable facts.
Firstly, the debt-laden false booming economy, which the bipolar relationship of Howard and Costello created, did become a "Pinocchio" trap for the young and vulnerable.
It has come to the inevitable climax of disaster that many warned that it would.
This was a sub-prime dodgy lending practice even before the Americans realised that their government had encouraged the same to develop. Solely for business profit. Looks good for foreign shareholders.
I am not suggesting that the Bush Administration copied Howard, quite the contrary: Howard has always copied Bush.
False ambition, false expectations, false advertisements, and a false economy.
Secondly, It seems inevitable that if a government provides a Pinocchio Utopia trap and, at the same time, introduces draconian legislation which seriously reduces the incomes and security of employment of the people that trusted them, the suffering is not only inevitable but will increase even as the US blunder that Howard so stupidly copied.
Let's be fair dinkum about this.
Howard/Costello caused the sub-prime dodgy lending in Australia just as the Bush Administration did in the US.
Increased deregulation of business practices and increased regulation of the citizens.
Something has to break.
So far, the only obvious breach is in the "New Order".
If Australia wins this next and most important election, how many of Howard's "team" could expect to avoid prosecution?
In the meantime, with Howard's penchant for euphemisms, watch for a change in the title "the Coalition" and keep our eyes on the ball.
Bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.
What a Difference When the House Speaker shuts up!
Yesterday in the House of Representatives, the Australian Labor Party's Anthony Albanese made a robust Motion of Dissent from a decision of the Speaker, Mr Hawker.
This was a magnificent move and, bearing in mind that Howard's Speaker does not allow any opposition party to have a point of order the chance for a free speech in Howard's trained monkey circus, was refreshing to say the least.
While it was also an enlightening example of the lack of Westminster practice in what was once the people's Parliament, it did not receive any mention in the TV channels that I watched.
It was given a very small and unexplained mention on the net which didn't even advise regarding the vote, if any, although we know where the numbers are.
So, perhaps this following speech by that same Labor gentleman can give our readers some idea of his brilliance.
In the Grievance Debate 6th April 1998, the Labor shadow Minister Anthony Albanese made the following observations:
From Hansard, 6th April 1998.
Bring on the election.
NE OUBLIE.