The managers of commercial radio stations are always competing for ratings. That’s how they stay in business. Announcers, DJs, Shock Jocks, Drive Time, Breakfast and Late Shift, are paid significant sums to provide the unforgettable quote that more often comes from a Western Sydney rugby league player or a drink driving full forward.
The more people listen, the more business’ advertise and the more the station can charge for that air time. It’s that simple.
More listeners equals more cash.
The punters want to hear controversial statements, inside information and what the super stars really think. It’s all grist for the mill and much of it is unadulterated, unsubstantiated bullshit.
I cannot remember a sportsperson – Australian, foreign, Martian – EVER calling a fellow competitor of the same sport (or any other sport for that matter) “a lump of shit,” live, on a radio, or any medium.
Which brings us to the latest utterances of the wayward ‘genius’, Andrew Symonds. Andrew plays cricket and fishes. He studied both these topics with great diligence during his secondary education years. The University of Moreton Bay and the sub-campus at the Gabba were his tertiary course locations.
No doubt he has significant skills as a cricket player, especially at the shorter forms of the game. His skills beyond the physical are less well defined.
What surprises me the most about the recent Symonds radio interrogatories is the absolute lack of responsibility shown by the two microphone muftis who lead the unwary Queenslander down the slippery sloping path of inebriated opinion straight into the bear trap of bad language and personal insult.
Roy Slaven (John Doyle) and HG Nelson (Greg Pickhaver) are known for their broad knowledge (not just of sport) and their intellectual observances, not for baiting unsuspecting fishermen and all rounders.
Surely they could have engaged Andrew in a conversation that would produce some erudite insight to the current McCullum selection conundrum without resorting to the lowest insulting common denominator.
These two guys were schooled in radio on Aunty ABC, grilling politicians, interviewing Nobel Prize winners, and back announcing symphonies. They had not grown through breakfast radio joke fests and one liners interspersed with traffic reports and corn flakes commercials.
Much more is expected of people schooled in proper process, tradition and rules of fair play. Once they had gleaned that Andrew was a little on the unsteady side, and the slurring of his speech was not the result of recent dental visit but through the agency of a couple of ice cold sponsor’s products, they should have eased him into more familiar areas such as his latest Hindi lessons with pen pal Harbajahn Singh or what lure to use when trolling for Flathead off Stradbroke Island.
To bring up the McCullum issue again when Andrew had already labelled it as “unAustralian” was simply unprofessional.
But possibly good for the ratings.
Cricket Australia are now faced with the difficult decision of giving Andrew ‘another’ chance even though he has had more disciplinary charges than Shoaib Akhtar just joking, NO ONE has had more charges than Elvis Akhtar!), tearing up his contract and send him packing to the Indian Premier League where his salary is $1.5 million, or severely reprimanding Nelson and Slaven and never letting an Australian contracted cricketer be interviewed by them again.
The irresponsibility of the media has been a thorn in Andrew’s career so far. The performance of two of its veterans is terribly disappointing and ultimately un-Australian.
Enjoy sports? Enjoy a bargain? All Sports Online has your favourite sporting brands at up to 70% off. Online only, premium quality sporting goods and merchandise at discounted prices. Get a deal now.
Do you have what it takes to become a sports writer? Write for the roar
Cricket articles
- What we do and don’t know about our Baggy Greens (112)
- Success of Twenty20 spells trouble for ODI cricket (106)
- Channel 9 commentators an annoyance this summer (102)
- One Day Cricket is suffering from Middle Child Syndrome (89)
- Cricket Australia must take a stand against racist spectators (89)
- Dave’s Warner-ful switch-hit panned by precious critics (84)
- Khawaja shouldn’t have been Shaun from the Test side (71)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (196)
- Hall of Fame for Indian legend Gavaskar
- Sri Lanka to target ‘weak’ Aussie bowlers
- India backing Rohit Sharma to find form
- Game-by-game preview of round 19
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- Like father, like son: Alister McDermott on a fast track to the Test team (30)
- Australia vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (196)
- Twenty20 cricket not up to the test (5)
- Pakistan’s win over England a triumph of character (21)
- Steve Waugh is right about cricket’s succession plan (5)
- India vs Sri Lanka, Perth ODI: cricket live scores, commentary (180)
- Let’s talk about selection, Test fans (28)
- Pakistan win shows what’s beautiful about the game (13)
Rabbitz said | January 27th 2009 @ 6:27am | Report comment
Geoff,
First up, do you not have a sense of humour?
Secondly, have you ever actually listened to H.G. and Roy?
In any infotainment medium it is the job of the interviewer to get “the quote” and if the interviewee “ain’t so bright” and can be led into the situation then so be it.
Frankly if Andrew Symonds wasn’t mentally quick enough to avoid the trap then maybe, just maybe, the fault lies not with the hosts but with the “victim”. More so, if the suggestions that Symonds had been drinking prior to the interview are correct.
Put simply, Greg Pickhaver and John Doyle (H.G. and Roy) were doing their job – Symonds clearly wasn’t up to doing his.
The Cougar said | January 27th 2009 @ 7:54am | Report comment
That is a ridiculous assertion, Geoff.
Are professional sportspeople not baby-sat enough already? Now you don’t want them to talk? He’s 33 years of age – isn’t he capable of adequately expressing himself?
Do we get to the situation where in an interview with people such as Symonds, he has a manager sitting next to him answering on his behalf; spitting out cliches so he doesn’t offend anyone?
I might use your theory the next time I’ve had a few drinks and my wife asks me to do the vacuuming. When I give an honest answer – no, if you needed to be told – then I’ll blame her for asking the question in the first place and having the audacity to expect a candid appraisal.
zhangbohan said | January 27th 2009 @ 7:57am | Report comment
I reckon the use of the word unAustralian should be banned.
Spiro Zavos said | January 27th 2009 @ 8:01am | Report comment
Geoff, I can see your point of view and understand what you are saying but I would disagree (to a certain extent but not entirely) with your criticism of the media in all of this.
The media has to try and interest the punters with news, gossip and analysis, depending on the differing markets they are catering to. It’s up to the players and their managers and the various sports organisations to ‘protect’ loose cannons from firing shots into themselves, as Andrew Symonds has done time and time again.
Having said that, I’m critical of media types who rely on sportsmen and sportswomen for any analysis or insight they are prepared to offer to the public. I’ve yet to hear really telling and insightful comments from captains and players, say, at press conferences after big matches.
These conferences are an excuse for the journalists to get a line for something to write about. Like the great Bill O’Reilly I refuse to go to most of these press conferences, preferring to work out for myself what happened and why rather than report the spin of a player or a coach.
Getting back to H.G and Roy and the Symonds interview. Apparently it was clear that the player had been drinking. It was totally unprofessional in those circumstances for the interview to have gone ahead.
Sometimes journalists have to protect players – and the public – from the stupidity of some players.
Brett McKay said | January 27th 2009 @ 8:04am | Report comment
Geoff, I suggest you listen to the Roy & HG podcast, and then get back to us on whether Symonds was “led” or not. I’d hardlt call asking Symonds to explain his “un-Australian” comment as being led on…
Harry said | January 27th 2009 @ 8:15am | Report comment
Mmmm not so sure Rabbitz … I think Pickhaver and Doyle allowed the need to generate ratings to justify their big commerical salaries to overwhelm what was the right thing to do in this case. These guys are far more savvy, and, lets face it, intelligent than “Roy” who is a professional cricketer, not radio presenter. Agree with Geoff.
Rabbitz said | January 27th 2009 @ 8:47am | Report comment
Harry (and Spiro)
Why should journo’s feel the need to protect a drunk sportsman? I am sure they didn’t force him to make himself available while under the influence.
Why should the journo make a special case for an over-pampered sportsman when they would make no such concession if this was Joe Blow on a different type of story?
Yes Harry, they are more savvy or possibly even smarter, but why should they alter their usual mode of operation, which has been on show for many many years, to protect someone foolish enough to expose themselves in an unfit state?
Seriously, media management is a huge part of being paid as a top-level sportsman. It is part of the job. If I was very good at one part of my job, but very poor at another, in fact so poor as to expose my company then I wouldn’t last very long. Part of accepting the payment is being able to do the whole job. If Symonds can’t do the media stuff, can’t carry off the public persona then a career change may be on the cards.
Is that a bit harsh? I don’t think so, professional sport is a business. The business world provides remuneration for being able to execute your role and for meeting your responsibilities. Symonds has been in the business for long enough to have learnt this.
Harry said | January 27th 2009 @ 9:10am | Report comment
Far enough rabbitz but don’t complain when we are constanly served watered down, boring meaningless tripe from sportspeople in their media engagements.
I’m not sure that media management is an integral and critical sporting skill … “well this season we got the wooden spoon/lost the ashes/didn’t win a tournament. But we starred at most of our media engagements, dominating the radio spots and increasing our share of column inches by 23%. Can I just add how pleased I am to deliver such a great media management performance for our fans to enjoy. We did it for you.”
See Tim Neilson’s interview on Channel 9 between innings yestereday as an example of this genre… I found his banal and apologetic utterings far more offensive and annoying than Symond’s utterances on a radio talk show.
Thats what Cricket Australia really needs to be investigating and acting upon.
Tim said | January 27th 2009 @ 9:32am | Report comment
Geoff: The gist of your article is that media personalities have a responsibility to stop sports stars from embarrassing themselves, despite the fact that their programs would be comparatively less successful as a consequence, simply because said sports stars are stupid. And that this is what it means to be ‘Australian’?
MarkR said | January 27th 2009 @ 10:22am | Report comment
Unwhat ?? I keep looking this word up in the dictonary but so far haven’t found it. Perhaps it’s been coined by politicians to explain how someone could have a different opinion & behaviours from them. It’s sad when a respected journalist uses this ridiculous term as it is a nationalist term with all it’s disgustong connotations. By the way, Symonds behaved like an idiot, to blame the journos is like blaming the girls for Warnes pathetic behaviour. Time he either got on the wagon or our of the team.