What Achievement!/?

 

Depending on your point of view, the punctuation after that headline is an exclamation or a question mark. The All Whites (New Zealand's football team, because they have to give everything nicknames here) won this country's highest sporting/ popularity vote at the Halberg Awards.

Their coach, Ricki Herbert won coach of the year for getting his team to the World Cup and ensuring that they didn't lose a game. They achieved more than New Zealand has ever done before in this global competition, contested by almost 200 countries (ten times more than play rugby world-wide). They had previously never got a point at the World Cup.

However, neither did they win a game - and therein lies the problem. There has been controversy stirred up by the awarding of the team of the year accolade to a team that didn't win anything. One of the members of the judging panel has resigned in protest - he is a rugby supporter. The All Blacks were also nominated (they have won all but one test this year) Hamish Bond and Eric Murray were finalists in the team award (they won gold at the world rowing championships) as were the Kiwis (the Rugby league team who beat Australia in the final of the four nations) and the Silver Ferns (gold medal in netball at the Commonwealth Games).

Many of the comments on news and sporting blogs have become quite snide and spiteful, such as the following sample:

"The All Whites shouldn't have even been there. Giving them the team award is an insult to all the sports men and women who actually won something - not get knocked out of the first round of a multi-round competition."

"I don't know how a team that didn't win anything can scoop the awards."

"Congratulations New Zealand for rewarding mediocrity, Way to show the youth of today that participation is the key."

It all begs the question - what are the criteria? If it means winning above all else, then no, the All Whites didn't do that. If it means achieving more than your country has ever achieved, then yes, they did. Incidentally, Julian Dean would have been my sportsman of the year - he completed every one of the UCI World Tour events, a phenomenal achievement which no New Zealander has ever done before.

If it means capturing the attention of the nation and bringing the sport to national recognition, then they have certainly done that. Football is the most popular (both player and spectator) sport in the world and New Zealand's fastest-growing sport. Apparently winning is not explicitly mentioned in the voting criteria, whereas showing 'sporting excellence on a world stage against high-quality opposition' is.
 
The decision was reported in USA Today - "Rugby-mad New Zealand has awarded its highest sporting honor to its national football team which was unbeaten at last year's World Cup in South Africa." It's a big talking point it seems. Don't hold your breath, but they might even stop calling it soccer. So, what are your thoughts?

Shout it from the rooftops!

Until last week, I didn’t know the name of that extremely annoying horn. You know the one at this year’s World Cup. People blast its monotonous note (the term ‘musical instrument’ is somewhat far-fetched) at rugby matches over here. I assumed it was for folk who hadn’t the wit or the intelligence to think up a chant or remember words. You know, like those mind-numbingly banal ‘thunder-sticks’ that are also all the rage in this country.

Apparently they are called vuvuzelas. And outside South Africa (and tedious provincial rugby matches in New Zealand) they are extremely unpopular. There is a website you can visit and vote as to whether you want to see them banned or not. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that they are ruining my enjoyment of the World Cup (Ronaldo is doing that) and it is up to South Africa to have them if they choose (indeed, there is even an argument that the vuvuzela is a symbol of racial and financial unification), but they certainly are excruciatingly loud and mind-numbingly unoriginal.

The BBC is considering filtering out the noise – if they could do this and keep the rest of the crowd noise – the singing; the chanting; the oohs and ahs; the cheers and groans – plus the commentator, then it would be worth it. You can just mute your TV, but then you won’t hear the commentators quips and questions – my favourite so far: “Will this be France’s chance to score? No.” So, I guess I’ll just have to suffer through it. The only game so far where I could actually hear the crowd singing through the wet blanket of whining was England v USA – funny that.

The vuvuzela cacophony sounds like a swarm of irritated (and irritating) mosquitoes – how could that possibly be desirable? I hate high-pitched noises (whistles; squeaky shoes on indoor courts; smoke alarms; children…) so these things give me a headache and set my teeth on edge. I am not alone. 83,951 people had voted to ban them on the previously-mentioned website at last look. Apparently this is ‘cultural snobbery’ and ‘patronising’. Fair enough; when in Rome and all that. Mexico gave us the wave (which, incidnetally, many organisations tried to ban); South Africa the vuvuzela. My, how we’ve suffered. It’s in Brazil in 2014 – we should have drums and sambas; that will be something to be celebrated.

Speaking of something to be celebrated – New Zealand gained their first point ever at the World Cup last night. It came in the 93rd minute, but it was the first decent cross they put in all game – congratulations Shane Smeltz. Never mind the fact that no one had previously heard of the under-19 and under-21 Danish goal-scorer; he is now a national hero. And rightly so. His precision header and Smeltz’s flash of inspiration elevated the lacklustre match into a public celebration of the beautiful game. And yes, my Arsenal-supporting-but-otherwise-likeable friend, you’re right; it does look magnificent, no matter how you look at it!

Naturally the media are jumping for joy despite normally ignoring the one true sport in favour of that ridiculous variety of hand-oval. The Guardian has a pretty fair report of the match. Okay, so they may be a little unfair in describing it as ‘asbestos-clad’, but they can’t take that point away from New Zealand. They deserve to party long and hard – after they’ve concentrated in the rest of their campaign, of course. (One thing I would say; not only is your team's nickname not particularly approariate in South Africa - think about it - but you should stop waving those white flags. There's no point admitting you've surrended before you've even started!)
 
I must admit, I wasn’t expecting the NZ goal – nothing in the previous 92 minutes had led me to suspect that they even knew where the net was, but I was very happy to be proved wrong. I will be even happier if I am proved even wronger and they manage to take points from either Paraguay (unlikely) or Italy (practically impossible). If they get through the group stage I stand to win the grand total of $45. If you’re out with me that weekend, I’ll buy you a pint.

Hard work doesn't pay

Last weekend we went down to Invercargill so that Him Outdoors could run the Southland Marathon. It was celebrating its one hundredth anniversary and is the oldest full distance marathon in the Southern Hemisphere.

I hobbled around the 10km on a dodgy knee, and Him Outdoors ran the marathon in a personal best time (2:52:15) – he doesn’t really ‘do’ marathons unless they are off-road and over mountains.

But this isn’t really the point. What I noticed was that he was equal 23rd overall and 14th Master (a ‘Master’ is over 35 on race day). Twelve of the top 20 males were Masters. There were 33 Open men, and 159 Masters. In the women’s category the top two women were Masters. The ratio of Open to Masters was 17:58.

In the half-marathon, Bernie Portenski ran 1:27:27, the second fastest half marathon ever by a woman over 60. She was just over a minute outside the world record. I don’t suppose you heard about it.

You probably did hear about the LG Text championships, because it was on national news. The national ‘champion’ won $10,000 and a trip to New York to represent NZ in the world championships where the winner gets USD100,000.

Despite all the talk about battling obesity and pushing play, sport is not really encouraged for young folk. Obviously the bright lights and big dollars have allure. In real sport (from which I am excluding X-games, Monopoly, poker and paintball), there isn’t any for anything other than rugby. Hopefully the fantastic All Whites victory (although they might have to change that moniker in South Africa) might change this. But I doubt it.

Apart from some nationalistic flag waving, the Olympic rowing and cycling medals had little effect on the youth psyche. Why? Because it’s hard work. It’s a hell of a lot of training for a number of years to perhaps get a medal, and you probably won’t be that good. Early morning starts, quantified nutritional intake, sacrifices of nights out drinking and partying, commitment and dedication… Why not just press a few buttons or throw a few dice instead?

Peter Snell, John Walker, Murray Halberg, Dick Quax, Arthur Lydiard, Marise Chamberlain, Alison Roe – these are legendary names and rightfully so. They earned their reputation and respect by quite literally doing the hard yards.

Times have changed and what kids want these days, according to career surveys and interviews, is money and the ‘fame’. Often they have no concept that they actually have to earn that fame.

A friend of mine who interviewed potential hosts for a radio station told me that when she asked the candidates why they wanted to be on the radio, they nearly all said because they wanted to be famous – not a good journalist, a knowledgeable presenter, a music lover, a comedian, or even (perhaps knowing that they lacked any aptitude) a personality.

With the comparable rewards that are being offered, no wonder kids would rather sit on their arses text messaging their friends than go out training for five hours a day, fitted around their ‘real’ job because they can’t get sponsorship to be an athlete. They may be lazy, but they’re not stupid.