Titanic for the Titans (733 OWC)
...hits the field running. Chips, regathers and dives over in the corner and then realises nobody else is playing... packs up his ball and goes home.
__________________________________________________________________
Anarchy
Aging definitely has some disadvantages, not the least of which is grappling with change.
Nobody can successfully argue that change doesnt have its place. I offer ensuring that the game is relevant to contemporary societys expectations as one good reason for change. Embracing advances of sports technology is another that stands out.
Change may take many forms. The rules, ticket prices, jerseys, even clubs and the games management structure are among a list of many more that Im sure you all have debated at some time or other.
Conversely, there are a multitude of examples that subscribe to the late great Jack Gibsons adage of if it aint broke, dont fix it. That could well have been applied to the neutering of the scrum or as some Neanderthals would have you believe the abolition of the biff.
However, one thing really sticks in my craw as the debate about "rorting" and salaries takes precedence over the game itself. My gripe can be summarised by the question: Who should run our game?
How many of you can remember your first contact with your league club? I believe Im safe in suggesting that it went something like this
Somebody, perhaps in your family or a friend, suggested [read dared or bribed here] that you come down to play [read watch or accompany somebody here] footy for the local club.
When you arrived you were scrutinised by the powers-that-be and eventually asked to join. If you were a player [read supporter or hanger-on here] then you quickly learnt your place. There was a pecking order. The club had:
- a president (someone everybody talked about often disparagingly),
- a committee (generally treated with awe),
- some volunteers (mostly related to a player),
- a sponsor (a person who never understood why team songs were always so course),
- some legends (superheroes whose feats were celebrated regularly at the clubhouse [read bbq or presentation night here]),
- some fixtures (very old people who got into games for free although nobody could remember why),
- a coach (spoken about in hushed tones),
- a team captain (always sat in the middle of the team photo with a humble expression),
- a trainer (never mentioned in case he required an extra lap),
- a water-boy (the clubs dogs-body and font of information),
- some parents (generally of the team captain [read wannabe coaches here]), and
- a plethora of players who straggled in from all walks of life.
This hierarchy functioned because it was the fabric of every club, in every town, in every state, in every country that played rugby league. Put your own faces to the above.
But that is not all. There were the supernatural beings. Those mystical God-like figures who are mentioned only at club meetings as their secret edicts are handed down from some seemingly imaginary land where they pontificate over all things rugby league.
I am referring to the local league [read QRL, CRL, NSWRL, ARL, NRL here]
that sanctimonious collective that held the sway over every important facet of the game and who spoke of things that we mere mortals could only dream about. They were responsible for such lofty ministrations as the judiciary, selectors, referees, the media, the competition, the biggest trophies and the annual general meeting.
Complex yes but functional? Also yes. In the majority of cases this structure is still in existence in most of the near and far flung corners of the rugby league world, serving their communities. So whats my point?
Never in any organisation that I have worked for, or played for, have the employees, or the players, run the show. Sure, their opinions are heard and often acted upon. However, those who are disgruntled are soon sorted out, either by management or by their own choice or by that great leveller
natural selection. Its a win/win situation
we dont need them and they dont need us.
Some may argue that this system is antiquated and doesnt suit 2010. They may argue that player power is a reality and must be heeded or otherwise rugby league falls over. They may quote player drain, fans disinterest and diminishing sponsorships, particularly from the all-devouring electronic media. They may demand outrageously inflated salaries and the wider acceptance of some players ludicrous antics when out socialising.
They are wrong. Things may change. An independent committee may be appointed but there must always be a boss. If not we have anarchy.
__________________________________________________________________
-v-
