Dear Todd, Don't listen to Buzz (2018)

Monday morning before the opening State of Origin battle for the year is upon us and so too are the same people in the media trying to tell Todd Greenberg what to do.

Today it’s Phil Rothfield, appealing to Greenberg “to let the game flow. To instruct the State of Origin I referees to drop the nit-picking that has turned rugby league into a sometimes boring and stop-start snooze fest.”

What is boring is Rothfield’s pathetic nit-picking. His same old stop-start rhetoric is snooze-fest inducing.

More importantly though, Mr Greenberg, I would hate to see the day that the game is run by whatever some tired, whinging dinosaur in the media has to say.

It was their complaints after the Sharks v Storm game, where over 30 penalties were blown and legends Cameron Smith and Luke Lewis both spent time in the sin bin, which fuelled their attacks on the NRL for their unbelievable stance of enforcing the rules.

A few weeks later a total of 14 players were sent to the sin bin in one round, the most in one round in over 20 years.

Not once has any of these detractors employed anything other than the aggressively stupid and damaging tact of blaming referees. The players and clubs are committing the acts and deserve to be punished, yet are being let off and now it seems, have Rothfield suggesting they should be allowed to cheat.

What makes Rothfield’s stance today so much more laughable is the fact he was sooking about referees NOT doing their job properly last year. Now he’s demanding that they don’t do their job properly in 2018. This is enough evidence alone to prove that this man should never have his opinions on how the game should be run listened to, let alone considered.

We also know that refs have a history of being ultra-lenient in Origin games anyway, so there really is no crisis here, bar the one Rothfield is trying to create.

My message to you though Mr Greenberg is simple.

While your suggestion to #TalkTheGameUp is a good one, we are facing a different problem here on two fronts. Media attacking match officials is disgraceful and needs to be addressed, in a firm manner. We all know referees make mistakes, they are humans after all. But the constant denigration and the abhorrent insinuations by some commentators that the referees are trying to get in the spotlight, or the rubbish view of some fans that they are match fixing and the like, need to end. Be as harsh as you need to on this.

Because it leads to a bigger issue and my second point. The message this belittling of referees sends to children. That players are never at fault, it’s the referees who are to blame. Do we really want a game where kids are abusing referees? Or a game where no-one wants to be an official. It’s a hard enough job as it is, they don’t need to cop this verbal diahorrea from cowards that have never once tried their hand at being an official at this level.

Thank you.

Expansion: Yes. Relocation: No. (2017)

This week Phil Rothfield, who is laughably billed by the Daily Telegraph as ‘League’s most feared critic’, decided to sling some mud at the Wests Tigers by suggesting they should be canned to make way for an expansion side.

The Tigers (along with Parramatta and Penrith) are competing with the AFL’s Greater Western Sydney Giants for control and dominance of the Western Sydney corridor. Last year Rothfield was singing the praises of the Giants amidst the salary cap scandal surrounding Parramatta. He wrote the piece completely focusing on the scandals around the Eels and completely ignoring any negatives about GWS.

This alone leads one to consider if Rothfield has a hidden, pro-AFL agenda. He’s entitled to that stance if he likes. This piece has no intention of rubbishing the AFL.

There have been calls from the same small group of commentators for years suggesting there’s too many Sydney clubs. The only thing that changes is which team – and it’s generally whichever side is performing poorly at the time. The loudest and most recent were directed at Rothfiled’s beloved Cronulla Sharks during their string of scandals. Now, Wests Tigers are in the firing line.

But fans should not be concerned. These are merely tactics from the media to create future stories to essentially keep themselves employed. Rothfield’s opinion now has several follow-up pieces on the Daily Telegraph website; one where he produces the results of his poll about which team should get booted and another, a retort to the suggestion by the Tiger’ boss Justin Pascoe, who said, “We are not going anywhere” – which could be a reference to their 2017 campaign as well.

All that aside, it’s time to address this constant talk of relocation and call the concept for what it is: utter stupidity.

Sporting teams are unique. Their players will come from all corners of the globe, but their fans are largely situated in the same place. Furthermore, it doesn't matter where fans relocate to, they'll always support the same team.

Relocating a team alienates the vast majority of their fans, who can no longer attend their games because they no longer play in the area they once represented (ie - near the residence of a majority of fans). Those fans will be angry and disillusioned and are very likely to stop following the game with the same passion. That’s a cornered market of customers who have all been lost.

Then there’s the issue of where they are relocated to. If a location without a team is keen to be involved in the competition, it will be to support their own local side. Trying to get these people to support a team that doesn’t represent them is doomed to fail.

Even if they do accept the team and follow it, you have achieved very little. You haven’t necessarily increased the population of league followers, because the new followers just replace the lost ones.

The AFL understands this. They have nine Melbourne-based teams in a similarly populated city, across a smaller geographical area than the Sydney clubs in the NRL, yet there has not been the continued calls to cull those sides or suggestions there’s too many.

South Melbourne relocated to Sydney in 1982, around the same time the NSWRL axed Newtown (and, briefly, Western Suburbs), while Fitzroy merged with Brisbane in 1996, a couple of years before a the three new NRL merged entities in Sydney and the two-year expulsion of Souths.

The AFL realises the obvious point, that expansion without culling teams actually increases your supporter base.

This is a mindset the NRL must adopt. There is nothing wrong with expanding the competition to 18 teams – but they have to do it without killing or relocating any existing sides. Furthermore, the NRL should be looking to new markets for expansion, not existing ones. It would be entirely hypocritical if they were to cull a Sydney side because there are too many teams in the existing Sydney market, only to introduce a new team in another existing market.

Sydney can cope with nine teams. It had 12 Sydney sides in 1967, cut down to 11 in 1984, and wasn’t reduced again until after the Super League war. Given the population growth in Sydney in the last 50 years, nine teams is comfortably sustainable. Like Melbourne, Sydney also has a Rugby Union team in Super Rugby, 2 A League teams and a team from the rival code playing in the heart of the city.

****This article appeared on Commentary Box Sports website on  June 28, 2017****

An Interview With Rebecca Wilson (2013)

Rebecca Wilson is known by rugby league fans as a nefarious opinion writer, whose works fall on the creative side of the writing art form.

In an effort to allow her to reveal her true feelings towards the game and to explain herself, she didn’t agree to this interview.

This is an interview with Rebecca Wilson, but it is a case of art imitating life. I have carried out this interview using the very techniques that have been tried and tested by Rebecca herself.

Hello Rebecca, bad to meet you.
RW: I’m happy to be here.
First of all I have to ask, Rebecca, do you hate Rugby League?
RW: No. I’m a fan of the game. I just do not like the players or the fans.
Thank you for being so honest. May I ask a personal question?
RW: Sure.
Have you ever done something wrong like breaking the law, maybe something immoral or other similar things that you knew was wrong, while you have been in your current profession?
RW: I’m sure we all have done things that we know were wrong.
Did you get harangued in the media and by the population for all of these wrongs?
RW: Why should I?
Because you hold an important position in the media where you can persuade people to alter their opinions on a subject, as you have access to sources.
RW: What is a sources?
Inside information. People with intimate knowledge of an incident that may not be in the public domain.
RW: Is that what they are?
Well yes. What did you think they were?
RW: Stuff I made up for my column.
You mean ideas.
RW: No, I mean sources.
So, why are you so compelled to lay the boot into rugby league ad-nauseum, despite your own admittedly similar wrong-doings?
RW: Because it is a cash cow.
Is that cow related to you?
RW: Who?
Rhetorical question, sorry. Moving on, what would rugby league need to do to see you write positive articles about it all the time, highlighting the dearth of good work that goes on by players and clubs, unnoticed?
RW: Integrity and accountability would be a good start.
Would you be inclined to meet them halfway in that quest?
RW: Are there suggestions that I have no integrity or accountability?
Calling them suggestions would be naïve if I were to be completely honest with you.
RW: I believe I have no semblance of integrity or accountability. Never have. Never will.
Okay. Let’s change the tone a bit. Do you know much about rugby league, the game, not the rumours and gossip?
RW: I’m of the belief I do.
Which team do you support?
RW: The Cronulla ASADA Essendon’s.
That’s not a team.
RW: Yes it is. I almost comically, became one of their cheerleaders.
Really? Who got the cheerleader roles instead of you then?
RW: Kate Lundy and Jason Clare.
Figures. Rebecca, what do you consider to be the one great gift you have that separates you from the vast amount of writing talent in this country who are unable to get a cushy gig like you have?
RW: I must say, with great glee, I can start a witch-hunt better than anybody.
And that’s something you’re proud of?
RW: As far as a good witch-hunt is concerned, I am the messiah.
Do you consider yourself to be unique in your field?
RW: Because I’m a woman?
No, because you write gossip and hearsay and pass it off as fact. You have quite a bad reputation for publishing stories that haven’t been verified.
RW: I have colleagues who produce the very same dreadfully, almost comically bad, stuff that I do, like Phil Rothfield.
I can’t argue with you there. It’s just remarkable that they all manage to work for the same paper don’t you think?
RW: There are rogues in the ranks of the media, I admit.
Rogues is being generous isn’t it Rebecca?
RW: Yes it is.
Okay, penultimate question, using 5 words, how would you describe the ethics of the newspaper you work for?
RW: Circling wolves, judge and jury.
And finally, using 5 words, how would you describe yourself?
RW: highly paid, bad, without substance.
Rebecca Wilson, thanks for wasting my time.
RW: I have to bolt to the can, apparently it is full of sources for my next story.
Okay, bye bye.


All words attributed to Rebecca Wilson are taken from her following articles:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226650177032

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226619397056

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226640003412

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226635006210

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/spo...-1226598496568