Football vs rugby - it's media drivel
BY SAM BUCKLEIn the wake of the Bahrain win I swore I’d steer clear of the all too predictable rugby versus football media-driven hysteria - if for no better reason than I hate to be the guy who swallows the bait.
Alas, the weekend newspapers were so riddled with tripe and drivel that I’m afraid my principled resolve has been broken. Unfortunately, I’m also the guy who has to have the last word.
There will be a few media provocateurs, Joseph Romanos among them, justifiably amused at the frenzied reaction to their commentaries about the prospective future place of rugby and football in our hearts and national psyche. The ensuing public melee revealed a mixture of the weak, the ignorant, the knee-jerk, the small-minded, the defensive and the remarkably insecure. I wish I could say that was limited to blog posters and talkback callers. The weekend brought that media cycle to an ugly close.
Let’s start on Saturday with the New Zealand Herald editorial, which offered us a primary school history lesson. Apparently, “the fundamental reason” that rugby will remain king is because “rugby, or one of its offshoots, became the top sport wherever the British settled countries that had wide, open and green spaces. Football was appropriate to the cobbled backstreets of crowded British cities. It was left behind by those seeking a better life.” Honestly, what fluff and drivel.
That was weak. Courtesy of Michael Laws, things got a lot worse on Sunday. His brainless column in yesterday’s Sunday Star Times surely puts him front of the queue for his own national sterilisation programme. Laws is obviously your stereotypical close-minded, provincial, rugby diehard – terrified by what he witnessed last Saturday night and lashing out in a state of confused insecurity. We should definitely breed fewer of those.
What particularly struck me was Laws’ flustered and incoherent attempt to characterise the Kiwi sporting psyche in some attempt to dismiss and belittle the achievement, the buzz and sense of pride so many Kiwis experienced last Saturday night. You see, apparently, it’s our mentality to “always cheer for the underdog” and … wait for it … “to empathise with all small, insignificant things as a consequence”.
In isolation, you could generously describe that as a gross misrepresentation of a nation’s response to qualifying for the planet's most important sporting event. But Laws later reveals his real agenda, his real insecurity - and undermines his own shaky thesis in doing so. You see, rugby will always be our national sport because the “All Blacks mostly win” and “are the most successful rugby team on the planet”.
Elsewhere, Laws serves up the age-old anti-football tedium about boring nil-all and one-nil results – always a sure sign somebody truly has no clue about the game (did he even watch the Bahrain match?). If he’d thrown in a comment or two about “soccer wimps” and “diving cheats” he’d have been able to lay claim to the complete small-minded boofhead's guide to football.
And you know what, as much as I hate to admit it, if you peel away the raving and the insecurity, Laws is actually right. Football won’t usurp rugby in the public mind. Yet, the reasons are simple and nothing to do with one sport being inherently more “Kiwi” or more tuned to our national psyche. It comes down to product and profile. One A-League side and a big World Cup playoff every four years can never compete with five Super 14 franchises, 12 NPC sides and 15 All Black test matches every year.
PS: A final note to Eric Young, another Sunday Star Times columnist. Eric, contrary to the suggestion in your column, football fans have not been foolish enough to forecast the death of rugby. You mistake us for various media troublemakers. It was beatup, but the reaction was quite fascinating and revealing, that's for sure.
 |
 |
 |
Sponsored links
Newest First
Oldest First
Well summed up Sam.
I agree, Rugby has been and always will be the 'National Sport' here. The All Blacks have too much history to suggest otherwise.
However the fact that there was even a debate and that rugby fanatics got all hot under the collar when they witnessed the atmosphere and excitement generated at the Cake Tin last weekend was a win for football here... that has been unsurprisingly hyped up for all it's worth by the media here... which in turn generates the backlash from the rugby loving media and we get all the ridiculous football bashing articles that you have pointed out.
There is a combination of insecurity and jealousy in the rugby fraternity that football actually managed to generate a real atmosphere all weekend in Wellington.
As for football being boring... how about the weekend's rugby? Scotland 9 Australia 8 (one try). England 6 All Blacks 19 (one try). Glad I didn't watch either! Tottenham 9 Wigan 1 this morning. I know what I'd rather watch!
Yeah i dont see why there cant be a market for both, i love both rugby and football. (I also love giving my football playing mates crap about it being a girls sport, doesnt mean i dont love the game ;)
Mr Laws. Yes Bahrain has a population of 800,000 which isn't that great. However by beating them fairly and squarely over home and away fixtures - we have qualified as one of the five best teams in Asia. Here is a list of some population figures from those countries who were not in the top five. Terrible line of reasoning you chose.
People's Republic of China 1,322,597,000 India 1,131,043,000 Indonesia 231,627,000 Pakistan 161,998,000 Bangladesh 158,665,000 Philippines 88,706,300 Vietnam 87,375,000 Iran 71,208,000 Thailand 62,828,706
The paranoia of the sports media is understandable; they have a vested interest in keeping rugby "big" in this country, as a lot of their livelihoods depend on it. With people like this in the media promoting causes, New Zealand can rest assued that it will only ever be good at sports nobody else cares about.
Ah Laws, what a crack up. Is that man suffering from an early onset of senility? Every word he utters is filled with hatred.
Maybe he doesn't like the All Whites because there is an "H" after the "W" : )
Sam, Sam, Sam, you forget the media stories and columns were driven by players' quotes, comments from presumably "real" people on your own blog and All Whites stories (making no reference to rugby) in the immediate aftermath of the World Cup qualification. If you don't think Joe Six-Pack is talking about it and it's only the media fuelling this, then you're a fool ... And now that you've shot down everyone else's opinion from your turret, what exactly is your opinion?
rugby, yawn.
Scooter #7
First, my view is set out in the second last para. But to extend that. Will football usurp rugby? It already has and it never will. The nos participating in football have and will continue to grow but the profile of the sport will play distant 3rd or 4th fiddle to rugby because of the paucity of product on public show.
Second, yes there was a lot of blog comment from football fans, but it was about the qualities of the game, the great experience last Saturday, the global nature of football, the ignorance of some and, yes, the problems and flaws in rugby, its lack of atmosphere etc etc (much of it was provocative in its own right). But, despite all that - there was very little football fan suggestion that rugby would ever die or be supplanted in NZ long term. That was largely myth, misintepretation, misportrayal and provocation by the media. And the weekend's columnist didnt make the distinction between what football fans said and what they heard in their own minds.
Even Rory Fallon, who seems to have been quoted said something along the lines of "dont get me wrong, I love rugby," but "sometimes it needs to share the limelight". He never forecast its doom and neither did others. But it all seemed to tap some curious insecurity.
There are actually 14 sides in the provincial rugby competition - currently. Remains to be seen if the NZRU will follow through and chop four teams as they claim they will.
@Dandy #1 "The reality is we were given a very easy route to the finals". Whose fault was that? Oceania's only got a half a place, so NZ has to play off against the fifth-ranked Asian side. Sure it's an easier route now Australia's in Asia but as Greenie #4 noted, there are a lot of massive countries in Asia who weren't good enough to come anywhere near that play-off. And NZ did all they could and won the play-off.
If anything, Europe has far too many places. 13? How'd that happen (when China, India etc are fighting for 4.5 places)? OK, I know it's originally a European game but come on.
Guptill blasts Black Caps to victory in first T20
Quake felt across lower North Island
Hurricanes weather elements to beat Chiefs
One dead after Northland crash
Flights disrupted as severe thunderstorms hit Auckland
Fatal speed-gliding crash near Wanaka
Bolivian squirrel monkeys arrive at Wellington Zoo
Travellers stranded after Air Australia goes bust
Who cares, watch what you like, hell watch/play both like I do, there doesn't have to be this division...
I took all the comments about football overtaking rugby with a huge grain of salt, the reality is a good crowd turned up to one game because a lot was riding on it, and the media responded to the accompanying hysteria. When you get those numbers attending a decent provincial championship the game will have really arrived.
Congrat's to the team but you have to look at the context to know why we are there at all. The reality is we were given a very easy route to the finals. Fifa creates this scenario so the world cup has representatives from around the world (NOT the best teams) - just look at who has missed out...
Best of luck in SA though team, I will support you as I do all NZ teams abroad (ok not yachting, but since when has that been a sport)...?