I'd not really considered making a thread about the ball tampering thing, as, well the issue seemed pretty obvious, but then I just happened upon this article ...
"... Good Friday pumped to work on dogs v Souths game. The game destroyed by penalties. Left the game so disappointed," Johns said on social media on Friday night.
"Rushed home to watch storm v sharks purely as a fan.
Shattered watching the game "It belongs to the fans who pay to watch. Waiting for your response Todd.
"Don't blame the referees I feel for them. Pressure from above. Whoever it is at the top of NRL hang your head. The game belongs not to you or the players. ... "
[ Disclaimer : I'm not a footy follower. I do recognise the name " Andrew Johns " as a footy 'hero' ]
Johns is cited for the above text from the link.
To my way of thinking, the "game" belongs temporarily to whoever is playing it. The wins. the losses. the injuries. the good / bad media press.
The rules of the " game " come from the designer/s of the game, or the contemporary cultural adjudicators .
Obvious updates to the " game " will always occur with the strength of technology used to record it. With that in mind, it seems logical that rules and regulations would seem to be
stricter today than in times past. And so they must. Humans haven't suddenly become ' holier than thou ', and people like Mr Johns seem to have more thought for the enjoyment
( and money ) from the people who fill the stadium for their pleasure. I have to wonder why sloppy play is considered by Mr Johns to be more important to the game than the players
making the effort to improve their " game " skill. Would it be more about new players being able to play without having to have a decent skill for the game, meaning the " game " goes
on and keeps the money rolling in for the sponsors and rest of the huge works and jerks that are seen as needed ? To keep the pay checks coming in ? And also, when the players are seriously injured there will always be someone just capable of filling the slot ?
I think Johns seems to think the fans will roll up for the " game " regardless of style and calibre of play. I think ( hope ) he's wrong about that. Sure I know human blood sport is a niche
that has always had it's fans. But these mainstream sporting conglomerates rely on the youth from hard working and also more privileged backgrounds. Where the young teams they grow-up in
are still supposedly about the playing of the game and the team and the community.
is was very much like that, mostly. It does seem though that the onus on the win and the pay and the future of the individual after the " game" has become more important.
They have families, and properties and a 'name' due to the wins they make. Sponsors build them up. And Sponsors will bring them down if too many losses occur.
Fuck the sponsors. - Just recall how the Sponsors / media crucified Tiger Woods for his private life regardless of his obvious talent.
It doesn't make any sense to me. Cheating is cheating. And when it comes to a team sport where the play is about at least twenty individuals playing together, on the same / opposing sides, then it seems imperative to play by the rules and support your team.
If our sporting nature is allowed to continue it's corrupt downward spiral we have little to no hope of our humane redemption. There might be some who would say if it happens then it would be
standard procedure for our humane -ity.
And there would be absolutely no light in sight for a better calibre of politicians for us either.
... my excuse is no commercial tv here, so it might take me a bit longer to be ' over it '