It’s time to admit it: footy is dead.
Now, there’s a risk of being seen as the boy who cried wolf here.
In that old story, a young shepherd cried “wolf” so many times when there was no wolf, that when there actually was a wolf, nobody came to his aid.
The wolf was therefore able to suspend the boy for five weeks for tripping.
We don’t want that situation here.
I know that the cry “footy is dead” is one frequently made in the so-called media, especially since 2002 when the AFL Commission implemented a statutory requirement for it to be said annually. But this time, I fear, it really is.
You may have been following the Jack Viney situation, a case in which a young man was brought down by the malign forces of prejudice and political correctness, much like the novel To Kill A Mockingbird. Sadly, Viney had no Atticus Finch to defend him, and so injustice, in this case, was allowed to reign.
And so, the AFL tribunal made an incorrect decision, and thus did football perish.
I admit my complicity in this tragedy, as should we all. We were too complacent. We ignored the warning signs. When the AFL cracked down on head-high contact, we shrugged and let it slide, so willing to abandon the principles of head trauma on which Tom Wills founded the game.
When the AFL officially declared the bump ‘worse than child murder’, we just laughed it off.
‘We can still have football without bumps,’ we said, totally ignoring the fact that until 1906, football was only bumps. It was that year that the VFL introduced the concept of the ‘ball’, which was only ever meant to be an adjunct to the main business of football: the bump.
And now those nefarious administrators, intoxicated by the power our apathy has granted them, have outlawed accidentally crashing into people, or whatever it was Viney is supposed to have done. What next, outlawing kicking? Just in case you mistake another player’s head for the ball and accidentally kick his head off and then it’s a goal and a grand final is decided by a decapitation?
Almost certainly.
It’s impossible to overstate the impact the Viney decision will have on our great footballing culture. But I will try.
Essentially, the history of our great Indigenous game, which stretches back to when sailors on the First Fleet would take ‘speccies’ by standing on each other’s shoulders to catch seagulls for dinner, has been ground into dust by this decision. It is not only wrong, but evil.
That’s why, when I say “footy is dead”, I am in deadly earnest: the upcoming round must not take place. It will be a sad farce if this zombie sport is allowed to continue, with players sadly prancing around the field, terrified of physical contact, tears streaming from their hollow eyes.
So often it is said, ‘football is not netball’. Can we really even say that anymore? Maybe now, finally, football is netball. If we turn up on Friday night will we see everyone wearing skirts, being restricted to designated zones, and waving their hands manically in Irene van Dyk’s face? A few years ago I’d have said this was madness. But these days, who knows?
It can’t happen. The AFL has killed football: the least it can do is provide a decent burial.
Every game this weekend must be replaced by a tasteful memorial service, where the ashes of football are placed in a tasteful vase and placed on a ceremonial mantelpiece to be installed in the centre of each major football venue around the country. A statue of Jack Viney will be erected outside the MCG, with the plaque ‘the last footballer’ beneath.
For the rest of the season, every previously-scheduled AFL fixture will be replaced by a public screening of Cirque Du Soleil’s Saltimbanco.
Look, I know it’s hard to take. I know it hurts. But we can’t continue to look reality in the face and pretend it’s Miranda Kerr: we need to accept the facts.
The tribunal stuffed up, and our great game is dead. Time to stop the denial, and move on with our lives.
MichaelJ.
Guest
That's the one.
Rob
Guest
Was showing a mate some YouTube clips of "bumps" from the 70s 80s and 90s then looked again the the viney footage... Very very different. We both believed that he was in the right (and my mate is a crows supporter) and especially after watching the old vision where players would pick out a member of the opposition and raise the elbow - it's clear which was accidental and what was deliberate and viney wasn't deliberate. While it's nice to watch the old vision (my fav "bump" is still Barry hall v Trent staker) you can see why it had to be cleaned up but in recent years it's been taken way to far... After all accidents will happen - if it was for example Scott Thomson of the crows not jay viney of the demons who had broken a crows jaw would he have got suspended? No of course not... It would have been an unfortunate accident.
Penster
Guest
Gold, Iangou. Comment of the week.
Penster
Guest
Jason K
Guest
If you don't like football, why are you here? Why are you writing this? If football was really dead, you'd stop talking about it, the way we do with most dead things. Or could it be that this article is a piece of massive hyperbole? A total exaggeration of things? Could be that and also tinged with a bit of whining? Might that not be more likely to be the case than the actual death of football? Perhaps in future you could give some thought to your words before publishing.
Griffo
Guest
I've just seen the resurrection! Football died on Tuesday and on the 3rd night rose again. Go out and rejoice! Spread the good news that football is alive! I urge all football followers to attend the holy gatherings at your nearest temple of worship this weekend whether it be Patterson's Stadium, The Gabba, Docklands or the high cathedral The MCG. I have seen the light so did a few QCs with more sense than some ex footballers on the tribunal
langou
Roar Guru
Hopefully The Strokes can save AFL as well
Pope Paul VII
Guest
Rock and Roll is dead as well. A coincidence? I think not.
onside
Guest
I went to a fight in the early 80's and a game of Aussie Rules broke out. (Thankyou Rodney Dangerfield )
Bill C.
Guest
Entertaining read Ben, loved it.
Midfielder
Guest
Posted my comment at 10:30 no idea why its gone to the mods ... hopefully it comes up soon...Ben would appreciate you tho's on the post when it comes up...
Bayman
Guest
......or Carlton's Curly Austin.
Bam
Guest
I don't know about you guys, but I have a terrible hankering for some tasty seagull meat.
Axle an the guru
Guest
Thats true Franko but if you want to talk elbows then Dipper was the worst, just ask Essendons Alan Stoneham.
Franko
Guest
But he could have kept his elbows down... http://resources3.news.com.au/images/2014/05/03/1226904/550423-e2ae056e-cf55-11e3-ae84-eacdfc097015.jpg
Axle an the guru
Guest
I wouldnt call Lockett a thug just because he played the game hard, yes he done some untoward things in his career but who didnt back then. He was a big man, his job was to kick goals and he also just couldnt stop pronto when he was moving flat out.
Midfielder
Guest
Ben AFL is not my game and TBH with you my knowledge is quite small ... however I have been watching the reactions re the two week suspension and ask if the following post made by a RL fan on a RL forum shares or highlights similar issues... The RL post [remember this is not mine but I found it insightful] NRL identity crisis is a real problem . Society has shifted (for better or worse), being the biggest, strongest, toughest is no longer admired by all. In fact, fear of being sued or failing has led to us (society) being so scared of letting anyone take a risk, despite the fact that risks are often necessary and failures often the best way to learn, even if it hurts. Coming out of this, overprotective mums don't want their young kids playing the "rough game", or if they do and they get hurt it's no longer 'part of the risk of playing' it’s seen as negligence and a not fulfilling the duty of care on the behalf of the organisations involved. It’s been like this for at least 2 decades (possibly longer), prior to that the attitude was "a bit of rough and tumble would do him some good, toughen him up" RL has been smart enough to pick up on the fact they are losing market share because of this and as a result have changed the game to deal with it. However they have done so to such an extent that it’s pissed off the rusted on, die hard supporters without really appeasing the "somebody think of the children" brigade and are losing on two fronts now. There is truth veiled in humour in the form of "bring back the biff" etc that we see getting around. But this is how many of the RL diehards actually feel. But the administrators know there is no future growth pandering to that minority, (despite the fact that these "more beanies than teeth" bogans breed at greater rates than the average population) and as a result you have a watered down version of the game that doesn't prevent injuries but also doesn't allow some of the types of contact that old fans loved to see. Part of the injury problem is the professionalism of the game. My dad played grade rugby league through the 70's, they trained twice a week had no access to a gym as a result the body conditioning of the players was a little better than the average manual labourer. Nowadays everyone can be at the gym for hours a week, access to nutrition information and supplements are widely available. As a result their bodies are now capable of inflicting much more damage and they train them specifically for that purpose. It’s a lot harder (almost impossible) to train your body to withstand the punishment though, bones and spinal cords can’t be made stronger. So we'll continue to see the injuries. RL has two choices in my view. It can cut the crap admit the game is rough and let the bogans have there day in the sun (and the hospital), and the game will die off in a few generations and be left to a very small niche market of generational RL fans, or they can change it so injuries are reduced and the game becomes a shadow of what it could be and it dies off in a few generations. As I said it’s a identity crisis.
J J
Guest
Footy died with the South Melbourne football club
AR
Guest
Nathan Buckley asked whether the AFL MRP/Tribunal is trying to legislate against 'bad luck'. I think it's a fair question.
Lroy
Guest
Well Ive watched the replay a dozen times now, and the question has to be "could Viney have avoided contact".. the answer is "NO".. .. "could he have avoided head contact with Lynch" the answer is "NO".. Lynch was not standing up perfectly straight, he was bent over trying to get the ball same as Viney. It was an unfortunate accident, very sad Lynch broke his jaw, good luck to him in his recovery... but Viney really has been hung out to dry. He didnt lift an elbow, didnt jump up in the air, all he did was tuck his head in to protect himself... its how we teach kids to protect themselves. The decision is so bad, so wrong, MFC or Players Association should consider some sort of independant legal appeal.. this kind of thing cannot be allowed to stand. Some bloke deliberately hit someone with a raised elbow last year in a low class dog act that should have warranted 12 weeks out of the game.. yet he got virtually nothing... something really is wrong with the game today.