Are we willing to be charmed by D'Arcy?

After three years as the bad boy of Australian swimming, Nick D’Arcy’s public image seems to have taken a turn for the better. Granted when you’re at rock bottom, the only way is up but it appears the Australian public may finally be willing to give the convicted criminal a chance.

His seemingly never-ending saga continues to play out, this time as the man he was convicted of assaulting – former swimmer Simon Cowley – sought damages in civil proceedings.

The incident which set these proceedings in motion occurred over three years ago in March 2008, when D’Arcy king-hit Cowley at the Loft Bar in Sydney, breaking Cowley’s skull.

In the subsequent months and years, D’Arcy pleaded guilty to recklessly inflicting grievous bodily harm, was dropped from the Australian Olympic team, received a 14-month suspended sentence and was sacked from the 2009 world championships.

Each of these events was plastered on the front pages of the nation’s papers, along with plenty of other events, some relevant, such as ironman Tim Peach coming forth with his story of being assaulted by D’Arcy in 2006, and others clearly just in search of a headline.

Efforts to rebuild his public image were generally perceived to make things worse. First he hired celebrity agent Max Markson, the same bloke who has done such wonders for Lara Bingle’s public image. Then there was his interview on “A Current Affair”, in which he avoided answering Tracy Grimshaw’s questions like a politician – albeit an extremely poorly practiced, sweaty, nervous politician.

He was in the quicksand of public opinion – his every move and effort only served to make his situation worse.

In the end he served his sentence, was allowed to compete for Australia again, won his third straight Australian title for the 200m butterfly and even represented Australia at the Commonwealth Games.

Only it wasn’t the end.

Because D’Arcy ended up back in court – and the front instead of back pages – as that fateful night in March 2008 played out all over again as Cowley pursued a little financial justice.

But this time things were different. Instead of being the petulant child who, in one brutal blow, fractured a man’s skull then told a disbelieving public it was in self-defence, he seemed to come across in a different light.

Not quite a positive light but certainly not the black stain of previous opinion.

Take an article published by Malcolm Brown on The Sydney Morning Herald website.

“Mr D’Arcy’s response had been a reflex action after Mr Cowley, joining swimmers to celebrate the selection of the Australian Olympic swimming team, had slapped him on the face.”

Or Brown’s article from June 30th: “Mr D’Arcy said that when he was hit by Mr Cowley, ‘I lashed out, it was a wild, defence swing. I wanted to stop what was going to be another attack”.”

It may be very small but lately D’Arcy has been granted an honorific – “Mr” – whereas an article published on the same website on April 3rd, 2008, said “D’Arcy’s statement said he did not want to be tried in the media.”

No honorific – he’s just plain old D’Arcy, at a time when he had not been convicted of a crime.

Obviously it’s not a matter of legality but the standard practice for Australian journalism is honorifics are granted to all except sportspeople and those who are accused or convicted of a crime. D’Arcy ticks both these boxes.

It may be small but it seems this time around he’s being given a chance by the toughest setter of standards, the media. So what’s different?

Could it be that after three years, a missed Olympics, a sentence (albeit suspended), his name repeatedly dragged through the mud and now 180,000 of his dollars going to Mr Cowley in the civil case, there is a perception he has done the time for his crime?

Is it that Mr Cowley has been branded as opportunistic, after answering in the affirmative when asked by Paul Hayes (D’Arcy’s counsel in the civil case), ‘”By minimising your role in the incident, that you had little recollection of the events, you were endeavouring to advance your prospects in the civil case, weren’t you?”’

Perhaps it’s that this time around he’s avoided the media, instead preferring to let events play out in the court as he maintains focus on his flourishing swimming career?

Or is it because his swimming career is, after years of unfulfilled promise, finally flourishing?

A little over a week before the civil case began, D’Arcy became only the second man in nine years to beat Michael Phelps in the 200m butterfly. The 200m ‘fly is D’Arcy’s pet event but to beat the man who has won gold in the same event at the past two Olympics is no mean feat, particularly when that man is also arguably the greatest athlete of all time.

Historically, Australians have found it much easier to forgive sportsmen who have come back to perform well – think Shane Warne, Ben Cousins and half the players running around in the NRL.

Beating Phelps (just to be clear – sportsman, not accused or convicted criminal) has helped D’Arcy gain an honorific. Perhaps beating him at the 2012 Olympics will help him gain the respect and forgiveness of the fickle Australian public.