Elfster
Alex Ross (28)
From today, what used to be considered a decent, informative and useful coverage of Rugby Union in the Sydney Morning Herald (SMH) can be deemed dead. The patient has been taken off life support, the corpse is being prepared for burial. The parrot is dead.
I remember the halcyon days of the SMH coverage of Rugby from some years back. The depth and expanse of the coverage, well crafted articles that captured the spirit, colour and passion of the game. Skillfully written by journalists/ writers with a deep knowledge and passion for the game. That no longer exists - the ever decreasing numbars of SMH reader are offered some paltry cliched rumour mongering by some cynical Rugby-hating hack whose interest and knowledge of the game shows an immense depth to its shallowness.
We have entered the finals of quite a few sports at the moment. Including Rugby and these finals for Rugby include the Shute Shield and and the various finals in Subbies. Real grasssroots, real sport and an integral part of the sport. And what of these finals do we see in the SMH..apart from team lists for the televised ABC games none. Pages and pages of League, AFL, Soccer, the Delhi Commonwealth Games (and that will be an icon of nightmarish sporting irrelevance)...even harnass racing for God's sake. But little or no relevant Rugby.
If it was the Daily Telegraph we would expect this ommission, but it is a sad decline of the coverage in the SMH. And I don't necessarily follow the argument that it is a lesser sport and so deserves less coverage: look at League, it is slavishly supported by the press and thus gets ratings and is deemed a popular supporty...hell, even bear baiting with pre-teen children with mild personality problems would be popular with the same coverage that League gets. A self-sustaining parasitic (or more kindly symbiotic) relationship between the sport and the media for mutual benefit.
Nothing like this for Rugby. And with the decline of Rugby we also see the gradual decline in Granny. Out have gone the sub-editors with a functional understanding of the English language and in have come the new breed of self-important, politically correct, self-appointed founts of knowledge, opinion and morality who sit back arrogantly in their ignorance and view comment contemptuously on those who aren't part of their clique. Where Kyle Sandilands gets greater media coverage than floods in Pakistan and is a greater hero than "Diggers" being brought back in pine boxes from Afghanistan.
Really it is all qquite a pity. A shame. Oh well, rant ends, time to move on, for to paraphrase someone of old to dwell upon it may be uncomfortably and wrenchingly distractive, so" No, I will weep no more. In such a night To shut me out? Pour on; I will endure.....O, that way madness lies; let me shun that; No more of that."
On a lighter note I recommend the Shiraz from this mob. https://www.chapelhillwine.com.au/ - Dan Murphy's at Willoughy occasionally has it on special.
I remember the halcyon days of the SMH coverage of Rugby from some years back. The depth and expanse of the coverage, well crafted articles that captured the spirit, colour and passion of the game. Skillfully written by journalists/ writers with a deep knowledge and passion for the game. That no longer exists - the ever decreasing numbars of SMH reader are offered some paltry cliched rumour mongering by some cynical Rugby-hating hack whose interest and knowledge of the game shows an immense depth to its shallowness.
We have entered the finals of quite a few sports at the moment. Including Rugby and these finals for Rugby include the Shute Shield and and the various finals in Subbies. Real grasssroots, real sport and an integral part of the sport. And what of these finals do we see in the SMH..apart from team lists for the televised ABC games none. Pages and pages of League, AFL, Soccer, the Delhi Commonwealth Games (and that will be an icon of nightmarish sporting irrelevance)...even harnass racing for God's sake. But little or no relevant Rugby.
If it was the Daily Telegraph we would expect this ommission, but it is a sad decline of the coverage in the SMH. And I don't necessarily follow the argument that it is a lesser sport and so deserves less coverage: look at League, it is slavishly supported by the press and thus gets ratings and is deemed a popular supporty...hell, even bear baiting with pre-teen children with mild personality problems would be popular with the same coverage that League gets. A self-sustaining parasitic (or more kindly symbiotic) relationship between the sport and the media for mutual benefit.
Nothing like this for Rugby. And with the decline of Rugby we also see the gradual decline in Granny. Out have gone the sub-editors with a functional understanding of the English language and in have come the new breed of self-important, politically correct, self-appointed founts of knowledge, opinion and morality who sit back arrogantly in their ignorance and view comment contemptuously on those who aren't part of their clique. Where Kyle Sandilands gets greater media coverage than floods in Pakistan and is a greater hero than "Diggers" being brought back in pine boxes from Afghanistan.
Really it is all qquite a pity. A shame. Oh well, rant ends, time to move on, for to paraphrase someone of old to dwell upon it may be uncomfortably and wrenchingly distractive, so" No, I will weep no more. In such a night To shut me out? Pour on; I will endure.....O, that way madness lies; let me shun that; No more of that."
On a lighter note I recommend the Shiraz from this mob. https://www.chapelhillwine.com.au/ - Dan Murphy's at Willoughy occasionally has it on special.
