Norris takes to the stage in-front of his followers and starts to give a speech.
He’d grown up in Brooklyn, his parents had passed away and this young politician was seen to be authentic in the eyes of the public.
He was a real person they could relate to.
Norris tells the crowd that when you got in a fight in Brooklyn “it wasn’t whether you got knocked down, it’s what you do when you get back up and I came here to tell you tonight that I will get back up.”
His supporters break out into applause, but then he stops and says they didn’t really have that saying during his childhood. Instead, the line had tested well with focus groups so his team advised him to use it.
Norris goes on to reveal how they’d tested 57 ties to see how different colours made him look to different demographics.
They’d also spent $7300 dollars on a consultant whose job it was to find out how scuffed his shoes should be to get both the upper class and working man’s vote.
His authentic image was anything but. It was manufactured. Here was a genuine person surrounded by people who were trying to make him seem normal. It turned out the easier option was just being himself. No advisors, no consultants and no focus groups.
It was after watching the film on Saturday night – and I highly recommend it for what little weight my cinematic opinion carries – that I saw the front page of The Sunday Telegraph the next morning.
Australian cricket captain Michael Clarke took up about a third of the page, but the story wasn’t about the looming summer or his challenge to stamp his authority on the side in the post Ponting era.
No, instead, the story was about Clarke dropping underwear maker Bonds from his stable of sponsors.
The reason? Because his management team felt the man responsible for upholding the honour and tradition of the baggy green cap shouldn’t be seen mucking around in his underpants.
Normally, that would be a sound decision. But I couldn’t help thinking back to senate hopeful David Norris and his story about ties and shoe scuffing.
There’s a lot of similarities to Michael Clarke.
This is a move aimed at making him seem less like a model and more like an average bloke.
For some reason not everyone is a fan of the man nicknamed Pup.
They saw his former life of fast cars, a Bondi pad and a model fiancee and instantly made a judgement call about a person they’d never met.
Is that fair? Definitely not, but such is the price of fame.
If you’re in the camp that thinks Clarke has an image problem the big question is this: Will not seeing him on billboards in his Bonds change your opinion of him?
If it does then why?
Why should we care what Clarke does away from the cricket field?
If he is a good bloke does it matter who he poses for?
If he chooses to spend some of his downtime in-front of a camera does it matter?
Isn’t the most important thing that he has the tactical nous to win a test match?
As a cricket fan, I want Clarke to be able to sense when another fielder is needed under the nose of a batsman or when a bowling change is required.
If he fails to do that then you’re entitled to have a crack, but his character shouldn’t be judged by a Bonds commercial.
Like Norris in the Adjustment Bureau, what tie he chooses to wear or how scuffed his shoes are should not make one bit of difference.
jameswm
Guest
Al - this is a public opinion site - what do you expect?
Johnno
Guest
well mate yep i can easily live with myself every day, and am a normal level confidnet person with definates fragilites and insecurites of any other human being. Mick clakre is a human being, and i acknowldege I am the armchair critic and 2nd or 2rd grade cricketer at best and i would have to train full tiem to reach that level, so in reality i am just a average regular aussie bloke who is just a weekend hacker on the golf course, and don't have anywhere near the ability to play cricket for Australia, or any pro sport and he is more succesul in cricket overwhelming mismatch in his favour,I like 99% of the population have been relegated to the sports fan level in life, I didnt achive my childhood dreams of playing pro sport any pro sport like 99% of the Australian population. However pro sport is cut throat, and not a stable or long term form of employment, and it is vicous at times and disposal , people if they get injured, the aging process catches up with them, or there form is off or someone better coems along, there out the door. and i just don't like the bloke very much based on tactitcal descions he has made as a player, not steeping up in the big moments shows he isnot up to it let alone being the team leader, and how he has tactiacly dealt with his handling of endorsements and some of the high profile women he has dated have not been the suitibale image in my opinion that the Australian cricketer should project. And he is not a match winner, he is no tendulkar, VVS Laxman, Ricky Ponting, Mark Waugh, steve Waugh, Adam Gilchrist, Matt Hayden, or even damien Marytn he Marytn had way more talent and achived more. But the people who influence cricket in Australia build him up as such. He is an overrated cricketer on so many levels.
amazonfan
Roar Guru
Ponting was on TV all the time advertising a breakfast cereal. How is that any different? Personally this disappoints me, as like him or not, Clarke is a new-age guy (for lack of a better term), and by dropping this ad, he is artificially becoming something else just to please focus groups. I certainly agree that the test captaincy is important, however I think it should be based purely on what happens on what happens on the field. If we start talking about how 'Ponting/Waugh/Taylor/Border etc never posed in their undies…' then it's selective as Ponting did things himself that may not have treated the baggy green cap with the outmost respect.
Lolly
Guest
Stuff about Clarke is pumped out, seemingly almost daily and recently he had photographers into his own private boot camp. Are you saying he or his media managers are not in control of any of that?
Luke Doherty
Roar Guru
The problem is that Clarke isn't in control of what makes its way into the media. If he seeks publicity to get his real image out there - he is seen as an attention seeker but if he stays away from the media he is seen as closed off or arrogant. He can't win.
Luke Doherty
Roar Guru
Spot on Paddy Boy. It has in fact happened many times in the past where Clarke has had a sizeable bandwagon following him - but then they jump off as soon as something goes wrong.
Luke Doherty
Roar Guru
Thank goodness for that mate - Can you imagine Steve Waugh on a giant billboard or Mark Taylor!!!
jameswm
Guest
Oh woe is CA and the selection "panel". Katich should have been test captain, everyone knows it except those idiots.
Al from ctown
Guest
Lucky for you he isn't going to lose any sleep over your opinion mate... Just unfortunate he can't give his opinion on people like you in a public thread... But hang on, he doesn't know you so he would probably keep it to himself like any decent human being... Fair dinkum... Atleast wait until cricket starts until you start bashing again... Such poor form denotes large amounts of insecurities... But hey whatever gets you off at night pal. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
Bayman
Guest
dasilva, You make a good point. Since Test cricket began there have been plenty of Baggy Green heroes who frankly you wouldn't pee on even if they were on fire. It doesn't stop their runs, wickets and catches from being counted as contributions to the cause - and if we win the Test on the back of their offerings we still happily take the win. People are simply different and cricketers are just people with better hand/eye coordination. I don't mind the differences and, like most, I have cricketers I like and some on which I'm not so keen - but I still go and watch them play.
Johnno
Guest
Im simply going to say this , i simply do not like Micheal Clakre as a person, I never have and i would never invite him over to my house for a barbeque, he is simply not the type of bloke who i would want to be mates with, and thats my opinion on him as a person. I just simply don''t like him. I find him, arrogant, cashing in on endorsments at various stages of his pro sports career, dating high profile women who at times could jepordise the reputation of the baggy green, he's made alot of mistakes as a young adult and has acted immature at times, and he has not been a clutch player for Australia the most recent examples, ASHES 2010/11 and the World cup 2011. He is doing the baggy green more harm than good and i would of installed shane watson as captain he is making runs, and in my opinion has a better off field image to that Micheal clarke eg he has settled down now and is married , and has not been caught up in any controversy in a long time and went up to QLD to show his support for the flood vitcims that speaks volumes already of Shanes character.
Lolly
Guest
The best thing he could do for himself is drop himself back down to five. If he did that, he could pose in a golden bikini if he wanted, I wouldn't care as long as he started bloody scoring runs again. That would improve his image enormously for me. This whole PR manipulation stuff means nothing if he doesn't score runs.
Lolly
Guest
In their drive for media-tartdom, Warne is both dodgier and funnier, Michael Clarke is blandness itself.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Furthermore to this, he doesn't even like the nickname. He's often said he's bewildered to still have the moniker when most of the team is younger than him.
Ryan O'Connell
Expert
Honestly, if Michael Clarke was averaging 60 in all forms of cricket, no one care what he did off the field. The problem with being high profile/marketable and consistently in the public eye, is that when you start to falter on the field, people have ammunition on you.
Matt F
Guest
In his defence he didn't come up with the nickname. I don't see how it's much worse then "Punter" or "Tubby"
Cicero
Guest
Score lots of runs, consistently win matches and everyone will love him again. It's that simple. We are that simple. Also, drop the stupid nickname 'Pup'. An Australian cricket captain nicknamed 'Pup"? It's embarrassing and he'll never be taken seriously with a monniker like that. Any self respecting Clarke is a 'Nobby'
Al from ctown
Guest
It's also a funny thing that as different they are, warne and Clarke are the greatest of mates... To the point where warne gave him his playing number instead of retiring it... Is there that much difference in them or does Clarke just hide it better?... In anycase, I'm behind our captain and our future team, whomever it may involve. -- Comment left via The Roar's iPhone app. Download The Roar's iPhone App in the App Store here.
dasilva
Guest
Which leads to a next point. Does it matter whether the players aren't everyday men, down to earth nice guys? Should the cricket team only have players of certain limited personalities playing the game. Sure it doesn't seem like Michael Clarke is exactly the most accessible and likeable character in the game from what we see in the media but I don't think players should be punish for that. As long as he performs well and the player underneath him respect him then his job is done. He is not there to be liked by the public
Ben G
Guest
I can understand what they are trying to achieve and I realise that the two sports are a different kettle of fish. However, Pat Rafter paraded around in his Bonds and he is surely one of the most popular Australian stars of the last 20 years. Pat had the Aussie, every-man, down-to-earth, nice guy routine to a tee though. If Clarke did, then we wouldn't even be talking about this issue. I am sure Boonie or Warne could've paraded around in their Bonds and adults and kids everywhere would be buying a pair the next day.