Opinion 
 Blogs 
 Jeff Corbett 
 World Cup diving 

World Cup diving

The foolishness of Newcastle City Council's discussions about spending millions of dollars enticing World Cup games to Newcastle in 2018 or 2022 will be evident in the city's Wheeler Place from 4.30am on Monday. At that time about 1500 lairs and dandies are expected to gather to watch the diving that will be Australia's first 2010 World Cup match. It's to be on a big screen provided at ratepayers' expense, and it is beyond me why ratepayers should subsidise such a gathering of exhibitionists and nancy boys. Still, it may serve as a warning against spending any money to entice more of them to Newcastle at subsequent World Cups.

In my column in The Herald today I suggest that it may be worth calling into Wheeler Place after 4.30am simply to see the latest fashion accessories for simpering men and the histrionics that go hand in hand with soccer. It's man scarves, apparently, in plain, checks or knitted and in lambswool, baby alpacha and cashmere. Every man who fancies himself as only soccer fans can has the urge for a man scarf, and David McElwaine of Newcastle's Gentlemen's Outfitters tells me that bracelets and bangles are another hot item for men. Listen for the rattle as the prancing peacocks in Wheeler Place on Monday morning throw their scarf about like a stripper's feather boa. How long before they're carrying lapdogs and wearing heels?

I wonder if the big screen on Monday morning will show the SBS ad urging Australians to get over Fabio Grosso's dive in the final minutes of the match against Italy in 2006. Get over it, the voice says, it's just a part of soccer. Diving, cheating, screaming for your mother, thrashing about in unbearable agony is not part of soccer - it is soccer! Diving has a greater impact on the result of a game than any kicked ball.

Why should ratepayers' money go to a game for ponces, pansies and prancers when there's none for real men playing real football?

Print
Increase Text Size
Decrease Text Size

comments


Date: Newest first | Oldest first
Heh heh - I now have a new "Night Before Xmas" rhyme: "On Prancer! On Mincer! On Masher and Pansey! On Poncer, Dasher and Dandy!"
Posted by Father Xmas, 9/06/2010 2:15:23 PM, on The Herald
Jeff, as a long term recently retired player of football (soccer) and now a referee, you may be surprised that i agree with some of the sentiments you express here. I am constantly amazed at the vitriol directed my way from both on and off the field during matches. Off the field is out of my control mostly, but on field is different. for whatever reason most think it is ok to question every decision i make. It's not. They also (often) justify it by saying "you have to explain the decision". I don't. "I'm the captain. You have to tell me". Nope - nothing in the rules that compels that either. As a man management tool i will always explain why a contentious decision has gone a particular way, but the fact is that NOTHING in the rules of the game permits any player to question the ref's decision. The opposite is true, that any player who shows dissent by word OR ACTION is guilty of a cautionable offence. It usually comes down to how i am asked. respect gets a respectful response, abuse gets a card. Now, if refs would enforce the rules uniformly and get support from the governing bodies then simulation, dissent, abuse etc would be stamped out . Don't hold your breath though.
Posted by mikey, 9/06/2010 2:19:54 PM, on The Herald
You just have to know where to look. I am forwarding the article to all my (grown up) children and all my friends, none of whom bother about the round ball, under the heading of "Best soccer article - EVER".
Posted by Peter, 9/06/2010 2:20:11 PM, on The Herald
in addition, i don't think league is immune from this either. The judiciary decision to exonerate Thurston last week was a disgrace and an insult to the referees. He blatantly swore at and abused a ref, on camera, and they said there was no offence committed. What message does that send to the perpetrator and every young league player watching? Watch it explode and watch the exodus of refs from the game. It's shame because one thing Rugby League has done pretty well over the years is protect it's refs. Touch a ref at all and you're gone. Not so in soccer where the top level players seem to feel entitled to manhandle refs and they do so because there are no consequences to their actions.
Posted by mikey, 9/06/2010 2:23:59 PM, on The Herald
No apology required, JC. I will not be seen at Wheeler Place, or any other place, on Monday morning, and I definitely won't be mincing, mashing, poncing. As a hardcore insomniac, I'll probably be watching the early edition news on Fox........
Posted by Abundance, 9/06/2010 2:31:00 PM, on The Herald
Wow! I feel dumber after reading that. But what would I expect from a meathead!
Posted by Greg, 9/06/2010 2:31:43 PM, on The Herald
Jeff, you are homphobic, and you are wrong. Anti-discrimination laws in NSW cover sexuality, not homosexuality as you incorrectly state. There is no special treatment for gay men or lesbians. And Newcastle in contention for getting the World Cup? What a joke! Newcastle has become a backwater. The rantings of Corbett prove it.
Posted by teiwaz, 9/06/2010 2:33:36 PM, on The Herald
Respectfully, teiwaz, you are not right about at least the NSW Anti-Discrimination Act's singling out homosexuality.

http://www.austl ii.edu.au/au/legis/nsw/consol_act /aa1977204/

Posted by Jeff Corbett on 9/06/2010 2:38:00 PM
the rantings that teiwaz, safc jet, and footballer post on here confirm only one thing. They read your column, and that sells newspapers. Goal accomplished. I translate their comments as " you're crap. You're a joke. I'll read your column again tommorrow though".
Posted by mikey, 9/06/2010 2:40:35 PM, on The Herald
tired now! "yawn" "ho humm"
Posted by notashrink, 9/06/2010 2:41:16 PM, on The Herald
i·ro·ny (i'r?-ne, i'?r-) noun pl. ironies i·ro·nies 1.a. The use of words to express something different from and often opposite to their literal meaning. b. An expression or utterance marked by a deliberate contrast between apparent and intended meaning. c. A literary style employing such contrasts for humorous or rhetorical effect.
Posted by Abundance, 9/06/2010 2:44:10 PM, on The Herald
Are you suggesting, Abundance, that I am a soccer ponce?
Posted by Jeff Corbett on 9/06/2010 2:45:23 PM
< previous |  1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13  |  next >

post a comment


Screen name  *
Email address  *
Remember me?
Comment  *
 
We invite and encourage our readers to post comments. Comments are moderated and will appear as soon as our editor has approved them. When posting comments you agree to be bound by our Terms and Conditions.
Jeff Corbett
Bend the online ear of the Hunter's most provocative columnist.
Wrong uniform but you get the message
Wrong uniform but you get the message

Most popular articles

1) Apple iPhone 4 32GB44 plans 12%
2) Apple iPhone 4 16GB44 plans 6%
3) HTC Desire4 plans 2%
4) Apple iPhone 3GS 8GB33 plans 2%
5) Sony Ericsson Xperia X10 Mini Pro37 plans 1%

Mobile Phones | Broadband Plans

Get the best deal at Fairfax Digital - Rural Press

Travelworld_See the World
 
School Newspaper Competition


Newcastle Herald







Weather brought to you by:

Weatherzone

Navigate

Classifieds

More Ways to Read

Front Page

Current Issue
Privacy Policy | Conditions of Use | Advertising Terms | Copyright © 2010. Fairfax Media.
 SEND...
 SAVE...
 SHARE...