The Problem with Being Politically Correct
by Ben Darwin | 26 July 2010 (10:04)
I want to comment on something that has come up over the past two weeks: penalising athletes and coaches for their brutal – and let’s face it, entertaining - honesty. In particular, I want to mention the sacking of Jason Akermanis from the Western Bulldogs AFL team, for his outspoken behavior, and comments made by Brendan Cannon about Springboks’ coach Peter de Villiers, and his immediate retraction of them.
But first a little background. Akermanis had a colourful career with three AFL teams that spanned 15 years, and has always been a "character " in the competition. And because of this, he, and the teams he has been involved with, has had constant media attention, with journalists keen to ask him his opinions on just about anything. Akermanis also has regular media commitments, including a newspaper column and radio show. According to the papers, part of the reason he was fired was because he was too open with the media about things going on inside the team, but also loud in voicing own personal opinion on matters affecting the competition.
In Cannon’s case, he was reacting to de Villiers’ statement that insinuated his team was the victim of a conspiracy in its recent defeats in New Zealand. Cannon called de Villiers a "clown". He said, “I can’t believe that senior players like John Smit and Victor Matfield allow themselves to be controlled by this guy. He is a clown. He surely does not coach the team.”
Following this, Springbok management told Fox Sports that they wouldn’t let their players or coaches speak to the media outlet until Cannon apologised on air. While de Villiers is not treated with the same respect in world rugby as many other international coaches are, he is one of the most successful coaches. More importantly in regard to the topic of discussion, his comments and opinions make him one of the most wanted interviews in world rugby. Yet how seriously can the public take an apology that’s forced for the sake of TV ratings? Especially when Cannon’s apology was cleverly worded without him ever actually saying he was sorry or wrong for calling de Villiers a clown? And now, de Villiers has also had to “clarify” to the IRB and/or the NZRU what he originally said, by claiming he was misinterpreted.
The hard part is that I’m not sure where freedom to make comments ends and persecution begins. As players and coaches, our organizations constantly tell us not to say the wrong thing, but it’s these “wrong” things that the media wants, and the fans want to debate. It’s in the interests of sport to be on the front page. And these comments have brought rugby and AFL to their respective front pages. In short, it sells tickets to the game – people want to see whether the fall out from controversial statements made off field, will spill over on field and into the game. It makes for an exciting game of football – whatever code it may be.
Yes, those involved with sporting teams need to monitor what they say to some extent. Yet the more we make people apologise for their comments, the less we will hear about the game off field or out of season. It will result in quieter and more double speak flowing from the mouths of pundits, coaches and players.
I don’t know the inner workings of the Western Bulldogs AFL team and so the sacking of Akermanis may well have been necessary, but I’m not entirely convinced an apology by Cannon was warranted for that issue. There are certain players and coaches we all look forward to getting under the spotlight for the very reason that they may shoot their mouth off.
Post Script
I just finished watching the post match press conference with de Villiers, after the Wallabies beat the Springboks. Interestingly enough, Cannon was given the first three questions.
