Robbie Farah needs to grow up
Columnist By Ryan O'Connell, 29 Mar 2012 Ryan O'Connell is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- NRL, Robbie Farah, Rugby League, Wests Tigers
6,867 reads
Robbie Farah fires up at Matty Johns on NRL on FOX (Image courtesy FoxSports)
Related coverage
Wests Tigers hooker Robbie Farah appeared on NRL on Fox last night, and displayed the petulance of a teenage girl grounded for smoking. Whilst some fans have defended Farah, saying that he showed some real fight, the truth is that he came across as petty, sensitive and immature.
If every Wests player was as defensive as Farah was last night, the Tigers wouldn’t have had a try scored against them this season.
Matty Johns grilled Farah right from the get go, but the questions were neither personal nor offensive. They were the questions every NRL fan, let alone Tigers fans, wanted answered. Yet Farah took them as a personal affront.
For those that missed the show, some of the ‘highlights’ included:
After Johns asked about the Tigers being premiership favourites, Farah got the interview off to a frosty start by snapping back “Well, who made us favourites, Matty?”.
I’m not even sure what that answer means. Is he suggesting that the Tigers aren’t that good?
When Matty suggested the Tigers have been soft, Farah replied that “Our footy hasn’t been soft, it’s definitely been disappointing.” Half right Robbie. You’ve been soft and disappointing.
When Matty said that the Tigers missing 48 tackles against the Raiders was soft, Farah replied “Yeah, but did we scramble well?”. I have no idea how anyone could think that’s a defence for being soft.
If you defend well and aren’t soft up the middle, you don’t need to scramble. I’m sure Timmy Sheens didn’t re-watch the game and say “Gee our scrambling was good!”
When Matty said that the Dragons punched straight up the middle against the Tigers and that it was soft, Farah replied “That’s your opinion, mate. I’m sure people have their opinion on you.” Wrong Robbie. That’s not opinion, its fact. And there was no need for the personal rebuttal on Johns.
The interview went on with Matty asking questions about Farah’s relationship with Benji Marshall and rumours they’ve fallen out, whether Timmy Sheens has the support of the playing group, and the club potentially signing Willie Mason. Farah handled all those questions, to his credit, very well.
Especially when he said the rumours surrounding him and Benji are ‘bulls*t’, and that they only surface when the club has lost a few games.
Farah’s point that no one is more disappointed with the Tigers form than the players themselves was also one of Farah’s better moments.
At this point it seemed like Farah had calmed down, got control of his emotions and realised that the questions weren’t personal, but insightful.
But as the interview wound down, Farah said to Johns “We used to be mates”, before then unleashing with the comment: “I love a good ambush”.
Not content with that little outburst, Farah then took to Twitter and tweeted: “Just got ambushed on NRL on Fox. Pretty fired up ATM to be honest and pretty pissed off. Wanted to unleash more then I did.”
Robbie, it wasn’t an ambush. Matty Johns asked all the questions that rugby league fans wanted to know.
They weren’t personal, they weren’t insensitive, and they weren’t offensive. Furthermore, Johns halfway through the interview revealed that he had told Farah what questions he was going to ask.
As for Farah wanting to “unleash more”, what exactly was left unsaid? He is suggesting he would have gone after Johns even more?
If Farah wanted to go on a show and have a giggle and talk about his restaurant, then he appeared on the wrong footy show. NRL on Fox is a serious rugby league show for serious rugby league fans. It’s been a revelation this year and provided viewers with real insights about the NRL.
Sadly, the main insight from last night’s show is that Robbie Farah is petulant, sensitive and overly-defensive. C’mon Robbie, grow up.
Highlights:
Ryan is an ex-representative basketballer who shot too much, and a (very) medium pace bowler. He's been with The Roar as an expert since February 2011, has written for the Seven Network, and been a regular on ABC radio. Ryan tweets from @RyanOak.
- Explore:
- NRL, Robbie Farah, Rugby League, Wests Tigers
March 29th 2012 @ 10:29am
RebelRanger said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:29am | Report comment
Matty Johns is LEGEND
March 29th 2012 @ 10:31am
Johnno said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:31am | Report comment
In Robbie’s defence, and i was wondering about it as i watched last night he is under a lot of stress right now. A highly media publicised withdrawal in the middle of a 4 nations tour last year as Robbie Farah flew home to be with his sick mother , who has cancer.
I think last night some of the anger and fire robbie farad showed last nightwas due to the pressures and media scrutiny of his mothers health troubles was contributing to the tension on last night’s show between Matty and Robbie Farah.
March 29th 2012 @ 10:37am
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
I did think that myself, Johnno. Plus the fact he’s not 100% fit, and also suspended. All in all, I didn’t think it was wise for him to appear on the show, to be honest. He’s deserves credit for fronting the media and not shying away from his responsibility. But perhaps it would have been wiser if he simply didn’t.
March 29th 2012 @ 9:12pm
Pete75 said | March 29th 2012 @ 9:12pm | Report comment
I’ll keep it simple.
Robbie’s performance was intemperate, and probably unwarranted. But I do believe he’s under a lot of stress. Injury, his mother, suspension and the performance of his team. He’s a proud bloke who is disappointed with the way things are going at the moment.
Yeah, he could have done better. Most here know I’m a Tigs supporter so, disclosure done, I’m actually pleased he’s that passionate, even if I’d advise him to chill out a bit next time.
March 29th 2012 @ 11:32pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:32pm | Report comment
I appreciate the measured response Pete, especially as we’ve gone toe-to-toe on the Tigers before.
I understand that Farah may be under pressure and that it may have contributed to his behaviour and responses. But part of being mature is knowing when you should and shouldn’t front the media.
I too appreciated Farah’s passion, but he came across in a very bad way last night, that did himself and his club absolutely no favours.
March 29th 2012 @ 10:36am
sledgeross said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:36am | Report comment
I just hope that Johns keeps up with this type of questioning then. This line of questioning is not often seen so its easy to see why it was called an “ambush”. Hopefully NRL of Fox can keep asking these questions.
March 29th 2012 @ 12:02pm
Renegade said | March 29th 2012 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
He was asking Jamie Soward the same questions last week about being called a speed hump….and i think Soward is a bit of a tool in some interviews but he answered his questions a lot better than Farah – as i said Robbie was so defensive he sounded like a teenage girl not the captain of a football club.
March 29th 2012 @ 10:37am
baller said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:37am | Report comment
cronk staying at the storm for 4 more years
March 29th 2012 @ 10:54am
PLANKO said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:54am | Report comment
There will be a few clubs that have now go to plan B…..
March 29th 2012 @ 10:59am
Alan Nicolea said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:59am | Report comment
I agree Ryan. Good article.
March 29th 2012 @ 11:05am
Peter_M said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:05am | Report comment
I think the problem with Matty John’s interview and constant use of the word ‘soft’ is the fact that it is just an opinion and an adjective that has no specific meaning other than implying that the players aren’t trying their hardest.
I am sure the players are trying hard which is why Farrah most likely got upset. Like anyone who has ever played a team sport there are some days when you go out and try your hardest but get flogged by a better team.
Accusing a team of being ‘soft’ is about as personal as it can get to a professional athlete other than calling them a cheat.
March 29th 2012 @ 11:48am
A1 said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:48am | Report comment
Even most Tigers fans would admit their team has been soft. The Dragons game provided the biggest evidence. Johns said they were soft up the middle. They were. That’s not opinion.
March 29th 2012 @ 12:05pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 12:05pm | Report comment
Perhaps the term ‘soft’ is just an opinion. But it’s an opinion any objective viewer of the Tigers this year would have.
March 29th 2012 @ 1:19pm
Peter_M said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:19pm | Report comment
Yeah, my point was that ‘soft’ is an opinion. ‘Missing’ a large number of tackles’ is not an opinion.
No one can dispute they haven’t played well but calling them ‘soft’ seems to indicate that they aren’t trying which is why I think Farah took it personally.
It is going to be a long season if they keep playing the rubbish they are now though….
March 29th 2012 @ 1:58pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
Soft, garbage, disappointing, terrible, etc.
Whatever adjective you want to use, the point is the same: they’re playing bad. That’s really what Matty Johns was saying.
March 29th 2012 @ 1:39pm
Ben Pobjie said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:39pm | Report comment
In any event, one can refute the accusation of being soft, without acting like it’s illegitimate to ask the question.
A mature answer would be “Well I can understand why people might think that, but I disagree, and here is why…”
Those questions are actually an opportunity for players to educate the public about the reality of the professional game, the difficulties, why perception doesn’t always match reality etc. Getting defensive and abusive does nothing but allow the public to go on thinking you must be soft.
March 29th 2012 @ 9:15pm
Pete75 said | March 29th 2012 @ 9:15pm | Report comment
Well said Ben.
March 29th 2012 @ 10:53pm
Damien said | March 29th 2012 @ 10:53pm | Report comment
Totally agree.
Thats what really fired Farah up. Being called soft is quite offensive in league I reckon. Its just the implied meaning of the word.
Johns has added to his comment that he doesn’t think the Tigers are soft players its just that they are playing soft which is probably a better way to put it..
March 29th 2012 @ 11:34pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:34pm | Report comment
Soft, bad, terrible, not having a crack, weak, bad. . .
They’re all from the same family. The point is that the Tigers suck and Johns wanted to know why.
March 30th 2012 @ 9:36pm
Damien said | March 30th 2012 @ 9:36pm | Report comment
Ryan,
I beg to differ. You’ve made the the ‘Soft, bad, terrible..’ point already in this same post but IMO they have different connotation’s.
Just my humble opinion but when I played I would have rather been called ‘bad or terrible’ than ‘soft’.
You can be bad, garbage but still be considered having a crack. The GWS Giants got toweled up by 60 points against the Swans but nobody is calling them soft. They’re just not good enough yet. The Australian MMA fighter Anthony Perosh in a fight against Cro Cop in the UFC got absolutely smashed. He was not even within the same universe in terms of skill against Cro Cop. Cro Cop was even looking at the ref to stop the fight early becasue he was giving Perosh the mother of all beatings. But Perosh showed heart. Perosh was terrible against Cro Cop but no one called him soft.
Soft implies that the Tigers are just cruising through the week not giving a crap about training. Soft implies that the Tigers are scared of making tackles.
Quade Cooper is soft in defense, he looks scared when he makes tackles. Rob Horne has missed the most tackles in Super Rugby but I wouldn’t be calling him soft.
I’m not arguing that they’re not going well coz the results speak for themselves
The words may seem the same to you but there is a huge difference between them in the mind of a footballer..
March 31st 2012 @ 10:11am
Ryan O'Connell said | March 31st 2012 @ 10:11am | Report comment
But the context in which the word ‘soft’ was used was in reference to their 48 missed tackles, and the the fact the Dragons busted them up in the middle. In other words, their defense was soft.
That’s directly was Johns was alluding to, and when I watched that Dragons game, the immediate and only reaction that I, and everyone that I was watching with had, was that they looked very brittle in defense.
Or soft.
April 1st 2012 @ 9:27pm
Damien said | April 1st 2012 @ 9:27pm | Report comment
LOL. Very True Ryan.
Can’t argue with you there.
I reckon Johns and Farah took the meaning meaning in different ways..
March 29th 2012 @ 11:24am
Paul said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:24am | Report comment
I dont think it was the questions that made him defensive but the petulant way they were asked. Mathew Johns looks like he is on drugs and for me he is to full of himself, but then ive never liked the bloke since the scandal in NZ came out. Thats what i call soft.
March 29th 2012 @ 11:31am
Johnno said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:31am | Report comment
The group sex scandal in NZ really shocked me a lot i must say. I remember the a current affair interview with tracey grmishaw and matt and his beautiful and lovely wife Trish. Trish said it had been very hard. Dealing with all the scandal’s scrutiny being made public in the media. Matt johns has rebounded well, he now does a new show and breakfast radio.
March 29th 2012 @ 12:11pm
Patrick Angel said | March 29th 2012 @ 12:11pm | Report comment
Robbie should have told Matty that he needed to tick all the boxes and give 100%.
To be serious, they have been soft, none more so than Blair. I have no issue with people being told they need a teaspoon of cement, Canterbury needed it last year, and hardened up at the end. Didn’t always play the best footy, but you could see the effort was there.
March 29th 2012 @ 1:11pm
Lowdown said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:11pm | Report comment
It was great TV. It was great to see Matty Johns not shy to ask more than the normal, sterile questions were used to, where everyone laughs and hugs all round
And yes…The Footy Show is a dead-set embarrassment in comparison.
And so was Robbie Farah. He was petulant, childish and unprofessional. If I was a Tigers sponsor I’d be cringing.
It was almost like he forgot he was on live, nationwide TV, such was his slouched, dismissive and snarly responses to the Questions…none of which were that controversial.
I think the way he handled himself alludes more to the issues that Johns mentioned, than his actual words in response. Poor form Robbie.
March 29th 2012 @ 1:13pm
Will Sinclair said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
Ryan,
As a Tigers fan I was generally disappointed with Robbie’s comments – particularly in relation to the missed tackles.
But I think his response to the “soft” accusation might be him trying to shelter his team.
Remember that the Tigers are playing a 21yo prop (Aaron Woods – who has looked very good) and a 19yo prop (Matt Groat – who is not yet ready to start in FG). These blokes are just kids, and to be called soft because they’ve struggled a bit against the likes of Weyman, Shillington, White and Lleyroyd-Lahrs – well that’s a bit tough I think.
If Johns was serious about rugby league analysis, he would be making these points. Maybe together with some discussion about the young props he has seen enter the game in their teens and the particular challenges they face.
Coming out with the “soft” call reeks of being controversial to generate publicity. It’s not serious rugby league analysis, and it should not be mistaken as such.
March 29th 2012 @ 1:20pm
Renegade said | March 29th 2012 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
I’ll tell you what, that’s a very fair point….good post.
I personally thought it was great TV and commend Johns for asking the tough questions but in saying that your comments do have merit.
March 29th 2012 @ 2:02pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 2:02pm | Report comment
Will, I somewhat agree with you. But I don’t think Johns was trying to be controversial, honestly.
My wife, best friend, and all of my in-laws go for the Tigers. They’re as passionate as any Tigers fans. And I’ve been telling them that the Tigers have been soft. So when Johns asked that question last night, I thought it was great journalism – because I wanted to know what the Tigers felt about their softness. And I don’t think I’m alone.
March 29th 2012 @ 3:24pm
Will Sinclair said | March 29th 2012 @ 3:24pm | Report comment
I hear you Ryan, but surely that’s where an “expert” like Johns should be different to the fans?
He should be able to display – and explain – the game in a little more depth?
Apart from my example about the young props (above) I would have expected someone like Johns to recognise that the vast majority of the missed tackles by the Tigers on Monday night happened out wide. And I would expect him to discuss how smart David Furner was to predict that the Tigers would play a compressed defence (to protect their young props) and instruct his team to go wide early in the tackle count.
And I would expect him to have highlighted how dominant the experienced Canberra forwards were in the ruck area – how they were able to get quick ball while also slowing the Tigers ball. And I would expect him to explain how that leads to fatigue, which leads to missed tackles.
But we get none of this from him. We get “soft”. And that’s the sort of thing I expect from passionate fans – not from so-called experts.
(Have a look at what Jason Taylor does in the SMH each week, or what Rod Kafer does on The Rugby Club, and compare it to what we get from Johns and his ilk.)
March 29th 2012 @ 3:34pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 3:34pm | Report comment
But Johns (and other experts) did mention some of the things you’re talking about, Will. However, it was on Monday night during the broadcast, after the actual game.
Really, it should have been up to Farah to say the things you mentioned. Imagine how much better he would have come off if he answered a Johns question about softness with the replies you just gave?
March 29th 2012 @ 9:19pm
Pete75 said | March 29th 2012 @ 9:19pm | Report comment
So all your loved ones are smarter than you Ryan?
Why don’t you get them writing for the Roar?
March 29th 2012 @ 11:39pm
Ryan O'Connell said | March 29th 2012 @ 11:39pm | Report comment
Actually, they are ARE all smarter than me!!
The point is, there are very few people who wouldn’t have loved to ask Robbie Farah the exact same questions that Matty Johns asked last night. Because people wanted to know the answer.
Pete, if you had the chance, what would you have asked Robbie last night? (apart from an autograph!)
March 30th 2012 @ 3:36am
Pete75 said | March 30th 2012 @ 3:36am | Report comment
I’d ask how his relationship is with Tim Sheens…
I don’t have a problem with the questions he was asked. I think there is more to the Benji question than meets the eye. I suspect that, as Matt Johns says, he was prepped about the question, knew it was coming, and was pissed off from the get go. Probably, and I’m only speculating, he then felt that MJ was calling the team soft, about to ask him a question he didn’t want to have to answer and he felt he’d walked into an ambush. Again, I’m only speculating and I’m not saying he was in any way justified.
Another thing to consider here is that none of us knows the relationship between Farah and Johns. There could be history there, maybe Farah went in with some preconceptions.
Pure speculation once more.
To answer your question, I’d probably ask about the forwards and what is the plan is to add more depth to a pack clearly lacking it at the moment. The Tigers offence only ever clicks once they get their defence in order and that starts in the pack.
What is becoming pretty clear to me is that Farah it’s a pretty intense, some might say prickly, character. I don’t have a problem with that per se.
It was good television.
I’d also like to think that most of my comments are measured to some extent. Ink as passionate as they come about the Tigers, but I’d like to think that I do my best to “keep it real”. Others may disagree!
PS. If you want aan exercise in pure, hair pulling frustration, try writing your posts with a smart phone. This one took me the better part of forty minutes…
March 30th 2012 @ 9:50am
Ryan O'Connell said | March 30th 2012 @ 9:50am | Report comment
The way Robbie answered the first question, he was ready for a fight. It was an innocuous question, and Farah blew up. I think you’re right – Matty gave him a heads up and he was on the attack straight away.