Showing posts with label sport. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sport. Show all posts

Thursday, 9 August 2012

British National Pride

As I write, Team GB currently sits third in the medals table and, having passed our total haul from Beijing 2008, have our best tally in over 100 years.

All this success has produced a rather dramatic reaction in the British people that to some minds borders on being distinctly un-British. People publicly stating their national pride? Even comedians not mocking the Olympics for being rubbish? Winning stuff by being much better than anyone else? Mind you, winning anything in general is fairly un-British. We have always been a nation of plucky losers, supported for the effort, but not the success, with a handful of notable exceptions (Chris Boardman, Steve Redgrave, Ben Ainslie et al.). This got me wondering, has the spirit of the British people really changed that much? Are we about to become a nation of card-carrying, flag-allegiance-swearing jingoists?
Royal Mail stamp to celebrate Chris Hoy's Cycling Track Men's Keirin
Who didn't get a bit emotional watching Chris Hoy's power and refusal to be deprived of his sixth gold? He epitomises the new sense of Britain as winners, enjoy your special postage stamp and gold post box. Source: Daily Mail.
Britain has a reputation for being self-deprecating. The American migrant comedian Reginald D Hunter attributes it to the age of the country giving our humour a degree of 'maturity' that more recent innovations like America don't have yet. The Americans, he says, make fun of other people, the British make fun of themselves.
I think a lot of this comes on the back of the British Empire. Once upon a time we were a proud nation that owned the world, these days we realise that colonialism wasn't all sweetness and light and too much flag-waving is discouraged as the top of a slippery slope that leads to European domination and Nazi Germany Britain (the anagram you get from the title of this post and the reaction it produces is a prime illustration). There's also a sense that we aren't a nation overflowing with nationalism because, if we're honest, we can't, in all honestly, be that blindly proud of our country. We just aren't as great or impressive as we used to be, there are too many things wrong with Britain, too many things that are just a bit rubbish, too many things that other countries do much better than us these days. Like empires. And football.

In fact, I think football gives us an insight into where this sudden Olympian burst of national fervour has come from. To some extent it's always been there. You can see it in the way we flock out to watch the Jubilee celebrations, or the Royal Wedding, and we still flock out to support the English national team despite our only tournament victory coming in 1966. British people haven't totally given up on Britain - we wouldn't mind a reason to be proud of our country. We just need to have something that we can actually be proud of.
Jessica Ennis celebrates winning the heptathlon
We're even getting customised flags for our winners! That's confidence for you. Ennis had a lot of pressure as face of the games, but surpassed herself to win by a country mile. Source: Daily Mail.
And so to the Olympics. The opening ceremony was a roaring success, Twitter and Facebook exploded with proud (and surprised) Brits praising Danny Boyle's work. The Daily Mail was pilloried for criticising its inclusion of the NHS and what they considered an unrealistic protrayal of a politically-correct black father-white mother family (cue family photos of Olympics poster girl Jessica Ennis...). People were proud of the slightly nuts, very British presentation of British culture. And it was funny. Humour, in an opening ceremony, I know! And, honestly, I think we were also surprised that it wasn't embarrassingly rubbish, which only added to the pleasure (something that could be said of the whole Olympics so far, actually).

Then, to crown it all, we've started winning things. And not just scraping through either. Winning by noticeable distances, dominating the cycling and rowing. Winning because we're established as the best, not just as a one-off. British competitors have largely surpassed themselves, winning medals that haven't been won before, or that they weren't expected to win, or at least achieving personal bests. It's all come as rather a shock, and the whole country has been taken up with a nation-supporting enthusiasm that surpasses both the royal wedding and the Jubilee. The crowds have been deafening, even on TV. I knew people would get more excited by the Olympics once it started, but not quite this much. Total bores like Neil Morrissey have been shouted down, Britain hasn't been so united in quite some time. Andy Murray beat Roger Federer in straight sets at Wimbledon, for crying out loud.
Andy Murray Olympic gold
Even Andy Murray is officially British now. It wasn't just thrashing Roger Federer at Wimbledon or his brilliant tennis - he really wanted to win. Source: The Sun.
Sure, this national fervour won't last, although this new determination to win at the Olympics is starting to look lasting. But we will never again be the kind of country that swears allegiance to its flag, or that straight-facedly recites poems about British and Japanese opression of Singapore and our predecessors' noble struggle to throw off injustice. But then again, I think that's a good thing. It's good to have a healthy perspective on your country. But it's also healthy now and again to have something that you can really celebrate.

Today, Britain is justifiably proud.

Thursday, 19 July 2012

USA Dream Team 1992: the little I know

I'll be frank, my knowledge of basketball is incredibly limited. I didn't start even remotely following it until moving to Asia, where I found that everyone follows the NBA. That and the Premier League. I've never been that good at meeting people, but one thing I can do is learn about things that other people like so I can hold up a conversation, so I did some reading up.

I have to say though, that despite being a thoroughly bizarre sport in which teams regularly score over 100 yet only win by a margin of a few points, it also has its appeals. Sure, the first three quarters of a match seem fairly pointless to a layman like me, but the athleticism of the players is genuinely impressive. There's nothing in sport quite like seeing a player bung the ball half the length of the court to see a guy leap in the air, catch the ball, and dunk it emphatically (this is called an alley-oop for those of you who are uneducated).

So it is, with London 2012 approaching, that attention has turned to the current crop of USA players and their standing in history. They are undeniably talented - Kobe Bryant, Lebron James, Kevin Durant and Russell Westbrook aren't mugs - but Bryant can't help opening his big mouth and claim they are better than the Dream Team of the '92 Olympics.

This claim has been widely rubbished, as that team is generally regarded as being the greatest ever. If you're not familiar with this team, that's the one with Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Larry Bird, Scottie Pippen, Clyde Drexler etc. (seriously, I'm on thin ice here, I'm not entirely sure, looking at the roster, who I should list after Jordan and Johnson...). I guess it's a bit like having a football team that included players like Pele, Messi, Maradonna, Zidane, Cantona etc. Even the Barackness Monster has stated a firm opinion that the Dream Team were better, and watching their old matches, I have to agree.

So here are some videos from happy times, when the NBA was a team sport:







And as a little bonus, here's 'Air' Jordan dunking from the free throw line. If you've ever tried to dunk, you'll know this is seriously impressive - I can't dunk from right under the hoop, and I'm not exactly short:

Saturday, 14 July 2012

Thoughts on the John Terry racism saga

With the not guilty verdict rendered in the John Terry/Anton Ferdinand racism case, it is important that the right conclusions are drawn, and the correct future actions taken. So, in no particular order, here are some of my thoughts on the issue - feel free to add your own opinion in the comments.

  1. Football has issues - I think it is fair to say that the way footballers speak to each other on the pitch is pretty appalling. Sledging takes place in many sports (it is a time-honoured tradition in cricket), but only in football is it so utterly foul-mouthed. Much has been made in the newspapers of what they like to refer to as 'industrial' language. Having had a fair bit of experience working in an 'industrial' context, I can testify that such language is common, but it is very rarely used in such an aggressive and directly abusive way - football stands apart on that. For all their 'Respect' campaign and handshakes, the FA have clearly failed to engender a sense of basic human decency in players - oh for more of the Iker Casillas spirit, who on seeing Italy suffering at 4-0 at the end of the Euro final, urged the goal-line official to tell the referee to end the match out of respect. No wonder neither Terry or Ferdinand wanted this in court - neither have appeared in a favourable light. Even if Terry was not racist, neither player has demonstrated themselves to be a paragon of virtue.
  2. This shouldn't have gone to court - This decision puzzles me. Why, of all the offences committed on a football pitch, was this one picked for trial? Why was the Suarez case not considered serious enough, and yet this one was? (Why is Terry not similarly up for assault after the second leg against Barcelona?) The FA should have dealt with this quickly, like the Suarez affair, recognising that as a sporting body, the burden of proof is not so heavy (the ICC had handed out its own spot-fixing sanctions long before the corresponding criminal trial had started). With the evidence available, it was never going to be established beyond reasonable doubt that Terry had racially abused Ferdinand - so why? All we have achieved is an undedifying opportunity for the * to compete with the letter e for 'most commonly used character'.
  3. Other victims will be more reluctant now - possibly the most serious of the repercussions from this case is that players who are already reluctant to come forward will now be even more reticent. The judge commended Ferdinand for his bravery in testifying, which is a fair comment, considering the appalling hounding he has had from members of the public. As with the Liverpool fans in the Suarez affair, people side with their team rather than wanting justice and condemning racism as they should. The FA could have dealt with this, handed Terry a sanction that he cares about (a ban to a footballer is much worse than a measly fine in this financial era) and demonstrated that racism is not to be tolerated. Out of fairness the criminal justice system requires greater proof, and therefore it was inevitable that they could not convict. It essentially boiled down to one man's word against another - and that is not enough to overturn the legal presumption of innocence (this is as it should be, but poses difficulties in cases like this). Will other players come forward knowing that they may not even see justice done?
  4. Terry's story did hang together - a lot of people came to their own conclusions before the trial on the basis of YouTube footage. Having read Terry's defence and watched the footage, it does actually make sense to me. His body language as he speaks can be interpreted as a sarcastic dismissal of an alleged accusation. Personally, I find it slightly more believable than the judge did. It is worth noting that the judge concludes that Terry did not change his story and was consistent throughout - whether it is true or not, there was not enough evidence to contradict him. People have compared this case to OJ Simpson's trial, but I don't think it's that clear-cut. I think Terry's explanation is legitimately plausible, whether it is true or not.
  5. The FA has work to do - the difficult of the FA waiting until after the trial to carry out their own work is that it may become harder to act contrary to the legal verdict. This season has made it clear that racism is not dead in football, or in the wider country - it is good in one sense that such an issue is made of this, because we do not want a return to the late 70s and early 80s. They must make sure that racism is not tolerated, but they need to go further. Football has long been worse than other sports for language used, both between players and towards officials. Perhaps miking up the ref might help - in rugby it ensures players talk to the ref in an acceptable manner. Football should enforce these things more - players can learn pretty fast when they have to!
  6. Where does this leave freedom of speech? - this is more a question than a comment. Should this even be a legal issue? Let me be clear, I think it is perfectly acceptable for the FA to forbid racist language around football grounds - every employer and professional organisation reserves the right to make codes of conduct, and I think that is right for the FA to do so. However, as a firm believer in freedom of speech, should the law of the land adjudicate on this matter? Let us assume that Terry was guilty of a racial slur - should he be legally prevented from saying it? Why has he been singled out? He was not inciting violent behaviour, he was not encouraging people to assault or discriminate against black people - it was an insult. Where is the line drawn at legally acceptable language? Should ginger hair-based insults be illegal? What about sexuality-related insults? I do not condone it by any means, but part of me is disturbed that this can become an issue for a criminal trial. As Voltaire said: 'I do not agree with what you have to say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it'. Thoughts? Are there things that it should not be acceptable to say? Should all things be sayable? If we legally forbid people saying things that are commonly agreed as wrong, does it open up the way to more severe censorship?
Anyway, those are my thoughts on the matter. Feel free to chip in, especially with your opinions on the last point.

Monday, 19 December 2011

Have you heard of Tim Tebow?

For those of you who don't live in America, you may be unaware of the American Football phenomenon that is Tim Tebow. Despite being widely regarded as not actually that good in a conventional sense (just read the NY Times!), Tebow has spearheaded an astonishing success story at Denver Broncos thus far this season. They were 1-4 at the start of the season (that's 1 win, 4 defeats) when the coach, apparently in desperation, gave Tebow a start. The result? He's 8-2 in starts this season and they look like making the playoffs - an achievement that is astonishing given where they were. 
But the thing that's really getting Denver going is not only the wins but also the manner of the victories. The Denver offense has been pretty ineffectual for the first 3 quarters before pulling some magic out of the bag in the final quarter to win some pretty exciting games. Not only that, but the manner in which Denver has been playing, with some devastating rushing (watch the opening quarter against the Patriots, wow), and Tebow himself choosing to run as much as pass, makes them a very entertaining team to watch, if only for watching the way they make the purists tear their hair out. Analysts are struggling to identify how they're actually doing it - but it seems to have a lot to do with the inspiration the rest of the team draws from Tebow himself, and that man's sheer determination to win.
Tebow runs it again. Credit: USA Today
But Tebow has been an extremely polarizing figure. And it's not mainly because Denver have redesigned pro-level offense to suit his strengths and weaknesses (although they have), but rather the much bigger issue is religion. In a sport where a few players have been convicted of various violent crimes, no one has attracted quite as much vitriol as Tim Tebow. Why? Does he kill people? No, the reason is he has been saved by Jesus, has a relationship with Him, and he wants everyone to know it.
The thing is that religion, especially the Christian Gospel, tends to be a provocative and polarizing topic, and it is something that many people would rather is left out of entertainment & sport (esp. in America where politics and religion are taboo subjects for polite conversation). But Tebow has recognised, quite correctly, that without Jesus he would not be where he is today. His abilities are given him by God, if His team does well, it is because God has made it so - and he is just making sure that everybody else knows that too. He mentions Jesus in every interview (sometimes in nearly every sentence), and a lot of people wish he wouldn't. But why shouldn't he?
Tebow here explains his thinking - listen to it for yourself, he explains it clearly, articulately, and with reasons that I can given a hearty 'amen' to:


As the quarterback of an NFL team, Tebow has what an amazing platform he has to tell others about the Saviour that He loves. On the sideline he can often be seen kneeling for a few moments in prayer - something that has been noticed by others and even has its own name: "Tebowing". Isn't that kinda awesome though? A guy in the NFL is so open about his faith that people have actually started imitating it - I know it's all for fun, but the message is clearly getting across. When he was at college level, the rules permitted writing messages in the makeup that players wear to reduce floodlight glare. The result? 160 million people Googled it. Man, what a megaphone to have.
Tebow flashing Bible verses. Credit: Examiner.com
The thing I love most about Tebow though, is that as well as being courageously open about his beliefs, and making sure that God is given the glory for his successes, he really seems to be genuinely living it out. He hasn't been caught in adultery, he doesn't assault gay people, he doesn't burn copies of the Qu'ran - the most controversial thing he's done is appear in a TV ad for a Christian group that opposes abortion - he seems like a genuinely nice guy and that really shouts in his favour. It is like Paul says in Romans 12:17-21 or Peter in 1 Peter 2:12: even when people are being critical, there is a strong sense that he doesn't deserve the stuff that's been thrown at him and that despite his technical deficiencies he really gives 100% - and it makes his critics look churlish in return.

So keep at it Tim Tebow. Stick by your guns. And keep winning, cos the Broncos are properly entertaining at the moment. And Christians? Pray for him, he is just a man in a very public position, pray that God would keep him strong as a good witness and powerful voice, and that he would not fall into temptation. Praise God that he can put His people even in such places.

It's gonna take some saving before I can afford the shirt though.

ShareThis