David Edwards
NormThe Australian Open Final and Cricket's
February 4th 2009 02:43
If SportingMind had a dime for every time he wanted to walk away from the field of sports journalism, then suffice to say that he would be a rather wealthy individual. Even after converting these dimes into "greenbacks" and exchanging them for the weaker Australian dollar, I would still be confident in having enough money to support my weekly lust for soft cheeses. For sport can often be seen as a microcosm of society; albeit a society with a tremendous ratio of physical and sexual assaults per capita - similar in many ways to Queensland's Gold Coast. To appropriate a song by The Smiths: some sports are bigger than others. Cricket, AFL and Rugby League dominate our newspapers like an abusive husband, to the point where we, the consumer/wife, can feel saturated and violated. Sometimes sport can be predictable and bland; other times it may be spontaneous and magnetic. The latter, of course, is an apt description of the Men's Australian Open Final.
They say there are two certainties in life: death and taxes. SportingMind believes that this old adage no longer applies and should be replaced. Hell, Diego Maradona has shown that it is possible to cheat the both of them. But after a turbulent week in sport, SportingMind is confident that one cliche is here to stay - and that cliche is Rafael Nadal.
Nadal's victory over Federer is the equivalent of earth's tectonic plates shifting noticeably. Until last night, I hadn't given it a second thought. Federer was still number one in my eyes. But before I knew it, a seismic event had occurred. Of course, this event had not simply occurred over night, no siree. This shift has been coming over the last year and a half; as Federer's game has slipped, Nadal's has elevated to an elite level.
For what it's worth, I will always prefer the silkier Federer touch over the brutal desire of a rampant Nadal. Perhaps I'm an aesthete, a purist at heart. So what if I salivate over a one-handed Federer backhand, or the way he pulls on a championship jacket after winning a tournament, languidly. Maybe I get off - in a weird, questionable manner - over the way he nonchalantly challenges a line-call, as he himself is a purist who dislikes the "hawk-eye" technology.
In stark contrast, Nadal is a new-age tennis player. Pure grit and determination, sacrificing elegance for the pursuit of victory. Federer is like a classic Hollywood actor, perhaps a Cary Grant. Not that I have ever seen a Cary Grant movie, but I imagine that he must have been very stylish and sophisticated. Watching Federer is like watching Casablanca: all the lines are classic and the performances are first rate. Watching Nadal is like sitting through a Daniel Craig 007 flick. It's fast, frenetic and full of action, testosterone and muscle definition.
The game itself was a classic. As has been said by many tired pundits, it had all the suspense of a Hollywood thriller. I see where people are coming from with this statement, but I felt that it more resembled a volatile episode of Question Time, streamed live on the ABC from parliament's House of Representatives. The unrelenting back-and-forth between the two players was quite extraordinary; vividly reminding SportingMind of a Julia Gillard - Joe Hockey stoush over Work Choices legislation in mid-late 2007.
The ironic thing about the game was that, on Channel 9, the Australia v New Zealand one-dayer was finishing at a similar time, in fact coming right down to the final ball. SportingMind would normally have flicked channels to catch the final ball, but, so engrossed in the tennis and the following presentation, I actually missed Vettori's heroics. Luckily, Channel 9 decided to show that Woody Harrelson/Wesley Snipes classic, Moneytrain, straight after the cricket. The wise cracking and smooth talking of the police duo, aided by a forgettable Jennifer Lopez cameo, kept me engrossed into the wee hours of the morning.
Personally, I am finding some of Channel 9's cricket commentary team unbearable at the moment. For instance, I don't appreciate Tony Greig's scripted spruiking of the upcoming Underbelly sequel, proclaiming it as "the age when Australia truly lost its innocence". I'd challenge that by saying that we truly lost our innocence when forced to endure thirty consecutive years of Greig's obscure diatribes on Channel 9. Adam Gilchrist's fumbled and mumbled references to Alphonse Gangitano are also worth mentioning, if only for exposing Gilchrist's speech impediment which, until this point, I hadn't noticed.
It wouldn't be a SportingMind post without reference to last night's Allan Border Medal, in which Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke shared the top honours, nudging out the tipsters' favourite, Mitchell Johnson. What a dazzling, fabulous night of nights; the AB Medal really is, as Mark Nicholas said, "cricket's equivalent of the Oscars". All the elements were there: Ian Healy and Michael Slater "schmoozing" in the crowd and on the red carpet: "geez Clarkey, you're batting way outta your league there!!!"; not to mention all the cricketers' wives dressed up in all their faceless glory. A few cringe-worthy laughs were extracted by focusing on Simon Katich's chest hair, along with a homage to Matthew Hayden and his penchant for hugging his team-mates. Mark Nicholas was looking superb in his tailored suit, along with a tongue-in-cheek Richie Benaud, who is surely becoming either incredibly ironic or simply quite senile. Either way, I'm all for it.
I sacrificed the final episode of a four-part ABC documentary to watch "cricket's night of nights". Why? Because it's the easiest two hours of television you'll ever watch. Just sit back and shovel it down your throat like a carton of Neapolitan ice-cream, just don't worry about the consequences.
-SportingMind
P.S. If anyone would like me to send them a lengthy essay consisting of further comparative analogies between Federer and Nadal, then send me an email. The piece is tentatively titled: Federer and Nadal - Yin and Yang.
They say there are two certainties in life: death and taxes. SportingMind believes that this old adage no longer applies and should be replaced. Hell, Diego Maradona has shown that it is possible to cheat the both of them. But after a turbulent week in sport, SportingMind is confident that one cliche is here to stay - and that cliche is Rafael Nadal.
Nadal's victory over Federer is the equivalent of earth's tectonic plates shifting noticeably. Until last night, I hadn't given it a second thought. Federer was still number one in my eyes. But before I knew it, a seismic event had occurred. Of course, this event had not simply occurred over night, no siree. This shift has been coming over the last year and a half; as Federer's game has slipped, Nadal's has elevated to an elite level.
For what it's worth, I will always prefer the silkier Federer touch over the brutal desire of a rampant Nadal. Perhaps I'm an aesthete, a purist at heart. So what if I salivate over a one-handed Federer backhand, or the way he pulls on a championship jacket after winning a tournament, languidly. Maybe I get off - in a weird, questionable manner - over the way he nonchalantly challenges a line-call, as he himself is a purist who dislikes the "hawk-eye" technology.
In stark contrast, Nadal is a new-age tennis player. Pure grit and determination, sacrificing elegance for the pursuit of victory. Federer is like a classic Hollywood actor, perhaps a Cary Grant. Not that I have ever seen a Cary Grant movie, but I imagine that he must have been very stylish and sophisticated. Watching Federer is like watching Casablanca: all the lines are classic and the performances are first rate. Watching Nadal is like sitting through a Daniel Craig 007 flick. It's fast, frenetic and full of action, testosterone and muscle definition.
The game itself was a classic. As has been said by many tired pundits, it had all the suspense of a Hollywood thriller. I see where people are coming from with this statement, but I felt that it more resembled a volatile episode of Question Time, streamed live on the ABC from parliament's House of Representatives. The unrelenting back-and-forth between the two players was quite extraordinary; vividly reminding SportingMind of a Julia Gillard - Joe Hockey stoush over Work Choices legislation in mid-late 2007.
The ironic thing about the game was that, on Channel 9, the Australia v New Zealand one-dayer was finishing at a similar time, in fact coming right down to the final ball. SportingMind would normally have flicked channels to catch the final ball, but, so engrossed in the tennis and the following presentation, I actually missed Vettori's heroics. Luckily, Channel 9 decided to show that Woody Harrelson/Wesley Snipes classic, Moneytrain, straight after the cricket. The wise cracking and smooth talking of the police duo, aided by a forgettable Jennifer Lopez cameo, kept me engrossed into the wee hours of the morning.
Personally, I am finding some of Channel 9's cricket commentary team unbearable at the moment. For instance, I don't appreciate Tony Greig's scripted spruiking of the upcoming Underbelly sequel, proclaiming it as "the age when Australia truly lost its innocence". I'd challenge that by saying that we truly lost our innocence when forced to endure thirty consecutive years of Greig's obscure diatribes on Channel 9. Adam Gilchrist's fumbled and mumbled references to Alphonse Gangitano are also worth mentioning, if only for exposing Gilchrist's speech impediment which, until this point, I hadn't noticed.
It wouldn't be a SportingMind post without reference to last night's Allan Border Medal, in which Ricky Ponting and Michael Clarke shared the top honours, nudging out the tipsters' favourite, Mitchell Johnson. What a dazzling, fabulous night of nights; the AB Medal really is, as Mark Nicholas said, "cricket's equivalent of the Oscars". All the elements were there: Ian Healy and Michael Slater "schmoozing" in the crowd and on the red carpet: "geez Clarkey, you're batting way outta your league there!!!"; not to mention all the cricketers' wives dressed up in all their faceless glory. A few cringe-worthy laughs were extracted by focusing on Simon Katich's chest hair, along with a homage to Matthew Hayden and his penchant for hugging his team-mates. Mark Nicholas was looking superb in his tailored suit, along with a tongue-in-cheek Richie Benaud, who is surely becoming either incredibly ironic or simply quite senile. Either way, I'm all for it.
I sacrificed the final episode of a four-part ABC documentary to watch "cricket's night of nights". Why? Because it's the easiest two hours of television you'll ever watch. Just sit back and shovel it down your throat like a carton of Neapolitan ice-cream, just don't worry about the consequences.
-SportingMind
P.S. If anyone would like me to send them a lengthy essay consisting of further comparative analogies between Federer and Nadal, then send me an email. The piece is tentatively titled: Federer and Nadal - Yin and Yang.
| 70 |
| Vote |
Comment by Norm
Consumption Malfunction
Equal and Opposite
Arses and Elbows
Footy Power
Kidding, I'm pro-Roger.
What gets me is that John Howard actually did marry Steffi "Margaret Thatcher" Graf in a quiet ceremony and had a baby with non-union nurses.
Comment by David Edwards
Sporting Mind
The real question is not whether these tennis stars are analogous to Australian political leaders, but whether they actually are our leaders, in disguise?
Nadal has all the tenacity of Rudd, while Federer's laid back style reminds me of an efficient John Howard at his best. Djokovic, of course, reminds me of Peter Reith. Let's take this further: Lleyton Hewitt is Cheryl Kernot, Andy Roddick is Barnaby Joyce and, of course, Maria Sharapova, with her penchant for high fashion and leggings, is quite clearly Alexander Downer.
Comment by Norm
Consumption Malfunction
Equal and Opposite
Arses and Elbows
Footy Power
Kim Hughes and Nat Despoja? ever see them in the same room? Nup. Wilson Tuckey: it's a stretch, but Ian Healy? Tony Greig: Laurie Oakes. Kerry O'Brien: Andrew McDonald; he asks a lot of questions of his opponents.
Djokovic as Reith takes the cake. hehehehehe
Comment by Norm
Consumption Malfunction
Equal and Opposite
Arses and Elbows
Footy Power
Comment by damian
Urban Telegraph
Sports and All
The Squirter McGee Diaries
Comment by sportsbar
Fret X
I just returned from a Rugby League trip to Cape York, I guess it has kind of changed my outlook on things and my priorities...
As to Nadal and FedEx, I propose they play a TestMatch... One 5 set match a day for 5 days...
Who ever wins the toss gets to pick the first surface...
eg. Day 1: Grass
Day 2: Hard Court
Day 3 Clay
Day 4 Rebound Ace (Indoor)
Day 5 Hybrid court consisting of all four surfaces... or return to the half grass half clay court...
Their battles are single handedly keeping men's tennis alive...