Nick Bendel
Does the NRL need to get off the booze?
March 9th 2009 05:54
After a sorry week in which rugby league suffered the latest in an incalculably long list of off-field incidents, Phil Gould repeated his proposal for all NRL players to be banned from drinking.
“These blokes need to be saved from themselves,” he reasoned. “It’s quite obvious alcohol and interaction with the general public is a recipe for major disappointment. Careers and reputations are [being] left in tatters over a moment’s weakness or ill-discipline. Six months ago when I suggested players may have to totally refrain from drinking alcohol it sounded like an extreme and unrealistic situation. Now I am not so sure. It seems like a necessary sacrifice to ensure a player’s career and livelihood.”
As discussion about these most recent examples of misbehaviour continues, and as debate about an alcohol ban rages on, it is worth recalling a salient observation that Gould made last year. He claimed that contrary to popular belief, the players of his era (1976-86) acted far more anti-socially than do those of today. Only because there was much less media scrutiny did it seem otherwise. Although he didn’t say it, perhaps if Todd Carney and Greg Bird had been running around two or three decades ago, we might all have thought that they were model citizens.
If Gould’s claim is true- and there seems no reason to believe otherwise- it represents a damning indictment of modern footballers. They may be fulltime professionals who get lavished with dietary advice, education programs and media training, yet far too many of them binge on alcohol, disrespect women and commit the sort of misdeeds that are guaranteed to make back page headlines. Maybe these dolts do need to be cut off. Maybe it’s time that they were saved from themselves.
Whenever these scandals periodically occur, somebody inevitably argues that [insert name of disgraced sporting competition] is merely a microcosm of society, and that therefore its athletes will inevitably make the same mistakes that ordinary folk make. This is true- but only to an extent. Common sense suggests that athletes are endowed with the same characteristics as ordinary folk- in other words, proportionally speaking, both groups can be expected to contain the same number of people with mental problems, troubled childhoods, learning difficulties and the like. There is, however, a key difference: while ordinary folk exist in the real world, athletes inhabit a world that is in many respects unreal, leading to the warping of their personalities. Consequently, their sporting competitions are not a microcosm of society. Consequently, we should not be surprised when the average athlete behaves differently from the average person.
What is this unreal world that elite sportsmen inhabit? Essentially, it is a world in which they never hear the word ‘no’. That is because everywhere they go, those they encounter try to please them. Visit a restaurant and they will be shown to the best table, because the proprietor understands how valuable the publicity will be. Visit a bar and they will be showered with free drinks, because the owner knows that their presence will guarantee the imminent arrival of many more patrons. Visit a sponsor’s function and they will be saluted by men in suits, because the bigwigs realise that being associated with a star makes them look good. Visit anywhere and they will be besieged by groupies, because the women are drawn to the masculinity and glamour that they exude. When your every whim is catered for and people are constantly competing for your affections, it is difficult for even the most mature and level-headed individual to retain a sense of proportion. If I want to jump on that car, why shouldn’t I? If I want to attack that fellow, why shouldn’t I? If I want to have sex with that lady, why shouldn’t I? After all, my actions are always praised; nobody ever says no to me.
These scandals, then, are probably best described as a clash of cultures. They are the product of athletes, with their warped personalities and unreal world conventions, mixing with ordinary folk, with their regular personalities and real world conventions. The two groups have differing rules and expectations. When they are in harmony- such as when a player expects special treatment and the proprietor/owner/bigwig/group ie benefits from providing it- everyone is happy. But when they are in disharmony- such as when a person doesn’t like having their car damaged, a man doesn’t like being attacked and a woman doesn’t feel like granting sexual favours- trouble ensues.
It is no coincidence that female athletes are responsible for far less misbehaviour than their male counterparts. Ask yourself this question: when was the last time you read of a scandal involving basketball’s WNBL, netball’s ANZ Championship, football’s W-League, or cricket’s Women’s National League? And while you’re at it, ask yourself this follow-up question: when was the last time you paid any attention to the WNBL, the ANZ Championship, the W-League, or the WNL? The lack of interest in female sport corresponds with a lack of interest in female athletes, which in turn corresponds with a lack of people trying to please them. Because they largely inhabit the real world, their personalities go largely unwarped. They hear the word ‘no’ almost as much as the rest of us, and thus they retain their sense of proportion. The result is that the women observe higher standards than the men.
For those who would claim that the differences are actually a result of gender- in other words, that female athletes behave better than their male counterparts not because they are less famous, but because they have superior genes- an examination of lower profile men’s competitions shows otherwise. While Australian basketballers, footballers and union players are hardly immune to negative publicity, they receive far less of it than those who play league and Aussie rules. The reason is that the NBL, A-League and Super 14- just like those aforementioned women’s competitions- are significantly less popular than the NRL and AFL. The result is less hero worship and more civility.
So is Phil Gould right when he says that an alcohol ban is needed for the NRL to improve player behaviour? Although it surely wouldn’t hurt, it is his other comment that is the most instructive. If the footballers of today are acting better than those of yesterday, it can only be because of all the counselling they receive. By reminding pampered athletes of their social obligations, these forums and lectures highlight the fact that they occupy a unique status. They are no longer living in the real world, they are made to understand. They occupy an alternate reality.
The more this message is drummed home to players, the fewer examples of misbehaviour we will see. The more that players are dragged from their alternate realities and forced to confront the real world, the more they will be reminded of the rules and expectations of that real world. Give them more counselling, send them along to more community activities, force them to undertake more everyday situations- anything to make them more normal. The better they understand the culture of the real world, the more they will respect it. An alcohol ban wouldn’t hurt, but it is education that is the solution.
| 101 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog