The decision by Dick Tayler to resign in protest as a judge of the Halberg Awards strikes me as petty. Taylor has said he resigned because the other judges decided to award the All Whites the top honour.
According to this TV3 news report, Tayler has said he doesn't want to be associated with an award where the recipient hasn't actually won anything.
The All Whites, as anyone who wasn't buried for months last year in an ice cave in Antarctica will know, went to the World Cup and drew all three games.
While some of the hype and excitement surrounding the team's efforts went way over the top, with some suggesting it was our greatest ever sporting achievement, it would be hard to argue that their achievement wasn't a very fine one indeed. Such is the level of competition in football worldwide, and so limited are our resources, that it was a massive feat for the team to even get to the World Cup, let alone come back undefeated.
Some people will probably say that awarding the prize to a team that didn't win anything is another example of PC madness, where even losers get to go home with trophies. But we are not talking about the fat slow kid who came last in the running race and then got a ribbon by the teacher for trying so hard.
Getting to the World Cup and then not losing a match is more like when double amputee Mark Inglis climbed to the top of Everest. He wasn't the first person to reach the summit, but with all the natural disadvantages he suffered it was still an achievement worthy of admiration.
People who say that another team should have won the prize are entitled to their opinions. Sports awards like these are always open to argument and debate. But suggesting that the All Whites are unworthy of the award goes too far.
Friday, February 11, 2011
4 comments:
I welcome comments, but I ask commenters to follow a few simple rules:
1. I delete anonymous comments. Please use either a name or moniker. I am not asking anyone to reveal their secret identity. Just don't call yourself "Anonymous".
2. Please don't abuse or defame others.
3. Moronic or nonsensical comments may be deleted.
4. I don't often exercise the heavy hand of censorship, but I do reserve the right to delete any comment I don't like, for any reason.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I play a lot of football. I was excited by the World Cup. I cared a lot about how NZ (the "All Whites" name sux) did there. But I don't think they should have got the award. Here's why...
ReplyDelete(1): The Halberg Trust's mission statement is that "the Halberg Trust will honour sporting excellence" (there may be more detailed criteria for judging performance, but I can't find them).
(2): Getting to the World Cup doesn't really count for anything, imho. In reality, it means we had to beat Bahrain. And even then we shouldn't have done so ... we ought to have been 2-0 down after the first leg alone.
(3) The NZ team then were not "excellent" in their performances in South Africa. I don't say this 'cause they didn't win their matches ... I know that a draw in football is often a great result ... but rather because they were completely outclassed in every game they played. To be brutally frank, we couldn't keep the ball for more than 3 or 4 passes, none of our players had the skills or the confidence to take on the opposition one-on-one, we relied on a single tactic (defend in depth, try to win possession from an error, then kick it up to the tall guys up front) and we had no fall-back when this plan didn't work (as it was bound not to, once it became clear this is all we planned to do).
(4): So, yes - the team was "gutsy", it was "committed", it was "plucky" ... but I don't think you could describe any of its performances as "excellent". In fact, that last game against Paraguay possibly was the worst game of football I've ever seen.
(5): Thus, to award this on the basis that NZ went undefeated in three games at the biggest football event on the planet is to make the opposite mistake to the one you accuse Taylor of (being fixated on results). Yes - we didn't lose. But we didn't ever look like winning ... we didn't really look like playing football.
(6) Finally, while we're on results, hasn't the World Cup kind of overshadowed the fact that NZ only won 2 of the 10 games that they played in 2010, losing 4 and drawing the other 4? Is that really the "most excellent" sporting achievement of 2010?
That is all I have to say. The rant endeth here.
what andrew said
ReplyDeletefurther and shallower - should have been disregarded for letting the sound of the vuvuzela into the nations airspace grrrrrrrr
(I also posted the below comment on Andrew's Pundit post on the same topic)
ReplyDeleteAndrew, allow me the right of reply.
As rants go, yours was superb. If there was a Halberg Award for ranting I would have voted for you :)
The Halberg Award recognises excellence in sport, not winning. The two things do not always have to go together.
It's true that no purist of the game would have regarded the All Whites matches as wonderful spectacles, but in fighting desperately for three draws against teams much more highly ranked than us, the All Whites showed an admirable resolve and team spirit, and they inspired the nation. They may have lacked somewhat in attack, but you don't get three draws in a World Cup by playing terribly. If nothing else it showed we had in Ryan Nelsen one of the best defenders in the game (and though I'm mainly a rugby man, I think Nelsen should have got the sportsman award ahead of McCaw).
I don't have a problem with people saying that the All Blacks, Kiwis, Silver Ferns or others should have won. It's just a stupid award, and it doesn't really matter in the end. But I do wonder why people are being so hard on the All Whites. During the World Cup they were our sporting heroes. Why are they a bunch of undeserving nobodies now?
Sorry Scott but I'm with Andrew on this. The All Whites overachieved everyone's expectations and were undoubtedly the feelgood sporting story of last year. But they didn't win a game and Andrew's points about their technical expertise are on the mark. It's not being hard on them to say this now because once their achievement is stacked up against some of the other contenders and put in context it doesn't shine so brightly. I expect judges of such competitions to provide some context and here they didn't.
ReplyDeleteAnd whilst we're talking about different standards what exactly does any NZ rugby team have to do to win the team award? The Black Ferns weren't even nominated and they won a world cup. For the fourth consecutive time. If that's not excellence what is?