we've gotta be careful. the media and the AFL are setting these little traps, and because of hour passion and hot blooded temprement, we keep falling into their traps.

just give the babies their bottle, and when the time comes that Football will reign supreme, their efforts will be for nothing.

Not a footy hatchet job - Baum has always given football a fair go in his pieces, and everything he has said here is 100% correct.

This type of article is good. This type of article is helpful. Hopefully it pushes the FFA to expect better from itself, because the gravy train isn't going to push itself along forever.

What do I think? I think half the people on this site (Football supporters) are whingeing and whining about the exact same thing the article outlines.

This is article is 100% accurate if people in this forum are anything to go by.

Yet all anyone here can do is talk about AFL conspiracy theories. Seriously everyone, give the AFL bashing a rest, it's become really embarrassing.

This whole Johnny Warren martyr thing has gotten out of hand and your seeing things that aren't even there.

Well said.

When will AFL or NRL (or any other sport for that matter) have 10,000+++ fans paying more than $10000 each to fly half way around the world to watch their team play?? They can only dream!!

Let alone have 1 BILLION TV viewers for a single match!!!

Not so hale and hearty farewell for Australians
GREG BAUM
May 25, 2010

The MCG is ill-adapted to soccer and the opening of AAMI Park over the road serves only to emphasise it. [b]Fifty thousand is a good crowd, but at the MCG looks patchy. A half-full MCG can't help but also look half-empty.

The pitch is remote from the fans and the clutter around it destroys the aesthetics. It must be hoped that Australia's bid book for the 2022 World Cup, presented to FIFA last week, has imaginative solutions.

[/quote]

Anyone outside of Melbourne could have told you that Greg.

Monday night, wet, winter, local opponents, non-competitive and rightly so we should not at all worried about the crowd.

Proof in the pudding will be the support in South Africa.

Edited by Mr: 26/5/2010 09:15:31 AM

I think i'm being taken out of context here. I was simply just trying to demonstrate how the language and phrasing of this piece creates a 'side' or opinion and therefore bias

Hey? Melbourne has the 3rd highest Greek-origin population outside Greece (or somthing like that), the 2006 game was a winner from the start.

Besides the standard sponsor related giveaways, the 2006 game waqsn't as hard to sell as Monday night's game was, didn't you see some of the ticket offers that were used to get a crowd to the 'G on Monday night?

Edited by diego's son: 26/5/2010 03:09:53 AM

"Slippery bugger keeps moving each time I try and press a key."

the alchohol is fine ...seeing the keyboards is the problem:lol:

In your 50's and still can't hold your alcohol :lol:

5 stubby's will do that , and texting kids don't help :lol:
and try 50's

Edited by jg: 26/5/2010 02:06:21 AM

Aussie born, at least a highschool education and in your forties and you still can't spell "through" correctly...

Having lived throu the 1974 world cup qualification and then having to wait 32 years to see
us get there again, having been the only aussie born kid in my high school soccer team and living throu the shit thrown at those boys , if thats the type of bias you think is hurting football well i think the game is more fragile than i thought.

I'm not sure that's at all relevant once you take into account that we were playing New Zealand tbh.

Of course it's going to be a negative piece, it was a poor game in a half empty stadium. It's not a good look to an outsider. Hell, it's not a good look to an insider.

So you feel that an AFL reporter writing in a Victorian newspaper presents a fair argument based upon both sides of the parties invovled?
Bias isn't necessarily in the exact wording of the article, it also can be the subconcious beliefs of the author.
this piece is highly emotive, something that contains emotion can never be taken as un biased

"Last night, the crowd was scarcely half as big, fewer if paying spectators are separated out."
Did he take into consideration the unpaying spectators from 2006?
throwing that last comment in wasn't completely necessary was it?

Funnily enough he has said basically what the AFL-sun weren't game to say in their publication today. I can't see any merit to bitching about this article that's telling it like it is and more or less repeating the opinions of the realists on here.

:lol::lol::lol:
What a mouthful that is.

As i can't see the obvious maybe you can highlight the bias you think is in the article.

Careful, you're speaking up against the anti-anti-football brigade brigade. If you're not careful you'll be branded a member of the anti-anti-football brigade brigade anti-brigade.

I think its more to do with pointing out the bias that exists within this article. As others have said, it is a common perspective shared by both football and other supproters.

Reading the article, he's said nothing different to what half the people on here have said. Are they all One eyed AFL fans clearly trying to tear down football as we know it as well?

so what ... doesn't mean his article is rubbish.

Greg Baum is one of the main AFL writers for The Age

Wonder what size crowd Frankston v Tootgarook would pull-similar world rankings

I thought the article was a fair reflection of the mood atm. It does feel differant to 4 years ago. Just reading through other threads confirms that. I thought 55000 on a monday nite at a ground most on here have bagged against a team that is not a major attraction was not bad.
Am i happy with the way we are playing....no
Am i happy with some of the selections and ommisions..no
but as always any team that pulls on the green and gold will get my full support.
As for the AFL reference...i must be blind.

:lol:

It is a bit of an emotionally-led rant though

I love how the instant something is printed/posted/written that's slightly against the socceroos, or football, in any way shape of form, it's branded a 'Typical AFL' view.

I think it's a publication by the age, no the herald as you say in the thread subject.

The man has a point, but forgets that nobody cares about New Zealand in football circles.

Not so hale and hearty farewell for Australians
GREG BAUM
May 25, 2010

THIS became not so much ''farewell'' as ''oh, so you're going, then?''

Farewell was four years ago, a crowd of more than 95,000, all the stars in action, culturally ideal opposition in the form of reigning European champion Greece, a vibrant game plan, victory courtesy of a cracking Josip Skoko goal and a cameo appearance from Archie Thompson to send the crowd home whistling.

It sent the 2006 Socceroos off to the World Cup on a rousing high. Anything seemed possible then, and almost was.

Last night, the crowd was scarcely half as big, fewer if paying spectators are separated out. None of Harry Kewell, Mark Schwarzer, Brett Emerton, Josh Kennedy or Scott Chipperfield played. Tim Cahill did, but only for an unremarkable half.

The opposition was unprepossessing New Zealand, a traditional sporting rival, but not at soccer, here consisting of a rump of players from club team Wellington Phoenix and sundry journeymen.

New Zealand's nickname, the All Whites, announces that they are definitively not the only team that New Zealanders really care about, and their starchy white shirts make them the team that is always away, even at home.

This anonymous New Zealand played Australia off the park in the first half, scored the first goal and might have had two others, suffered the consequences of a series of gruesome tackles by the Socceroos that led to four bookings - this was a friendly, but only barely amicable - and lost to the last kick of the match.

As justice goes, it was neither natural nor poetic, but it was summary, as it can only be in soccer.

From four years ago, only the venue was the same, and many of the team - a case can be made that these also were failings, not strengths. The MCG is ill-adapted to soccer and the opening of AAMI Park over the road serves only to emphasise it. Fifty thousand is a good crowd, but at the MCG looks patchy. A half-full MCG can't help but also look half-empty.

The pitch is remote from the fans and the clutter around it destroys the aesthetics. It must be hoped that Australia's bid book for the 2022 World Cup, presented to FIFA last week, has imaginative solutions.

As for the team, the fact that it is so little refreshed from four years ago is disturbing. The appearance of 18 players last night was a guise of new blood, but some of last night's squad will not be on the plane to South Africa, others will be sent home, and, by the time the Socceroos walk out to face Germany in Durban in three weeks, they will be significantly different from four years ago only by Mark Viduka's absence. This might be dressed up as stability, but in truth it is stagnation.

It means the sheer sense of wonder that was evident at the farewell game in 2006 and accompanied the team to Germany has been replaced by a queasy mixture of blind, patriotic hope and a deeper foreboding.

Last night's performance will not have allayed it. In the first half, the Socceroos looked short in stature at the back and for ideas at the front. Germany, Serbia and Ghana, Australia's group opponents, all are physically strong teams. The Socceroos stand to be monstered as Australian sporting teams rarely are.

Redeployed in the second half, the Socceroos had the better of it. But Dario Vidosic caught the mood of the night exactly after he at last broke through for Australia's first goal in the 57th minute. When finally unhanded by teammates, he cupped his hand to his ear as if to ask where was the noise, then made an uplifting gesture with his arms, urging a greater racket. But even the seagulls had stopped squawking.

In truth, there had been, until that moment, nothing to shout about and, in further truth, it had taken an unfortunate deflection to make even this moment possible.

No cheerleading was necessary four years ago; the Socceroos were on a roll then. Last night, against a New Zealand team that for the last third of the match had minds only for preserving itself for its own World Cup campaign, the Socceroos got their result.

They will go to South Africa with the unconditional backing and blessing of their compatriots, because solidarity is Australia's way. They will hold dear Australia's proclivity for outsized performance at global events. They will look for inspiration inside perspiration, because that is also Australia's way. But as the curtain fell on a lacklustre prelude last night and Australia said to its team ''see you soon'', there was an awful sense that it will be all too soon.


http://www.theage.com.au/world-cup-2010/world-cup-news/not-so-hale-and-hearty-farewell-for-australians-20100524-w89o.html?rand=1274708403947


He misses the point, of course there wasn't much atmosphere & play was scrappy - we were playing the Kiwis.

Sounds like an AFL Footy hatchet job, talking down the World Cup in favour of Saints against the Bulldogs. FFS. #-o

What do you think?