Too Old For These All Nighters

 

I have been staying up late to watch sport for as long as I can remember. Whether it’s for the Tour de France, international cricket or to watch English football, being up in the middle of the night for a game has been part of my life forever.

At present we are experiencing an apex of late night sport watching activities with the Tour de France overlapping with The Ashes and before that, Wimbledon. There’s also been some late night motorsport on too and some others, depending on your interests. So you’d think I would be in my element, getting no sleep and loving every minute of it and that’s what I thought too, but for the first time I have found myself not able to do it anymore.

Every night I have gotten settled in to watch le Tour and the tennis or cricket and right as it’s starting to get good, I can’t keep my eyes open anymore and end up passing out and missing all the action. I think this is something that ends up happening to us all as we get older. First you can’t handle the all night partying of the early 20s and eventually you can’t even handle the all night TV watching. I’m officially getting old at the ripe old age of 28.

Watching sport has a way of forcing you to come to terms with your own mortality, even if you aren’t actually doing anything besides sitting there and watching a TV screen. First comes that day where you finally realise (well most of us anyway) that you aren’t going to actually become a famous athlete and that most of the guys you are watching are younger than you. That is a sad, sad day and I don’t think I’m fully over it yet, despite the fact I was never good at sport and barely played it.

Then after that, comes this day, where you can’t even watch sport like you used to. As someone who actually writes about sport and planned on writing about these late night events, it certainly has made it a lot tougher considering I’m not actually seeing it happen.

So what do I do? Either I accept the fact that I no longer am the spring chicken I once was, capable of putting in the hard yards on the couch watching TV, or I train harder than I ever have before, stop coasting off natural ability to stay awake and get there on determination and hard work. Or perhaps I should go down the route of performance enhancing drugs and take up drinking coffee.

All I know is that this phenomenon is new to me and I don’t like it one bit. Hopefully I can put it behind me and get back to watching sport like I used to, because we’ve got an entire Ashes series in front of us as well as the meat of le Tour still to come. Then we go straight into the start of the English Premier League season and I foolishly am once again optimistic about Liverpool’s future.

Yes, I am fully aware that this entire silly article is the quintessential ‘first world problem’. Shut up.

Contextual Heroes

Armstrong during his interview with Oprah

A few days ago a friend who is not a huge sports fan asked me a question, which was perfectly legitimate, even though most of us took it for granted.

She asked me why was Lance Armstrong was such a big deal when it is generally accepted that everyone else was cheating too?

The question was not asked in defence of Lance, but rather wanting to know why he was the one being so heavily scrutinised compared to others. For example, Alberto Contador may not have won seven Tours, but he did win an impressive three before being suspended and having one of his victories stripped.

The answer in one word is: context

So much of sport nowadays, especially with the “24 hour media cycle” as it’s called, is about contextualising the actual sporting events and achievements. Two players may put up the exact same stats and win the exact same number of games and yet those two athletes could be viewed in very different ways depending on the stories around them.

Lance Armstrong deserves what he is getting now for the way he acted during and after the actual cheating. I don’t need to rehash all the despicable things he said and did as I’m sure you’ve all seen enough of it now. But the point is that if he dealt with the accusations and everything else the way some other cheaters did, perhaps he could have avoided so much of the damage now done.

David Millar was never Lance Armstrong and never won a Tour. He also never started a major charity or became one of the most recognisable athletes on Earth. Therefore perhaps it was a lot easier for Millar to be honest and open about cheating when he was caught many years ago, but Millar was not only forgiven by the cycling community, he is actually one of the most respected guys on the circuit and now a big advocate for cleaning up the sport.

Both Millar and Armstrong cheated in the same way in the same events. In that regard one isn’t really worse than the other outside of the fact that one of them won. But the way they dealt with the situation was so different that the results are also vastly different.

Manti Te’o is not only an absolutely bizarre and fascinating story; he is also a huge example of how context shapes our views on athletes outside of their athletic endeavours.  People seem angry and upset over the fake girlfriend scandal even though it has nothing to do with him or even how he played. But the reason it is such a big deal is that people form opinions on sports based around the stories surrounding them. Manti Te’o wasn’t only famous because he was one of the best players in College Football and at the most famous College Football school, but because he famously overcame the deaths of his grandmother and girlfriend in the same week.

Finding out that the basis for their opinion was false makes people question their own judgement, even if they had no reason not to believe the story when they heard it in the first instance. Discovering you believed a lie is something that hits home for everybody, whether it’s in their personal life or even about a football player they watch on TV. That’s why I believe people are so up in arms about this, especially when this particular lie (or at least embellishment) was used to bring spotlight to the athlete in question.

However in some instances we overlook off field issues. Ray Lewis is about to end his NFL career in the Super Bowl and is one of the most respected and beloved NFL players of his generation.  But it was only a decade or so ago that Lewis was on trial for murder and admitted lying to police to help his friends, who were later acquitted as well. Lewis pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice, but nowadays the story only seems to even be referenced via Twitter jokes and completely ignored for the most part.

So why does Lewis and many other athletes get a pass where others don’t?

It comes down to how well an athlete is able to handle the situation after the fact. Whether that involves great PR and damage control people or just being honest about the situation, most of the time the public are willing to give second chances if they think the athlete shows they deserve one.

Another factor, as much as it probably shouldn’t matter, is how well the athlete performs after the scandal. Ray Lewis continued to be a great player for many years whereas Lance Armstrong is already retired. Michael Vick had one superb season when he returned from his dog fighting scandal and some people looked past that and focussed on what he was going on the field again.

In Australia, Shane Warne was always getting himself into trouble, even if never anything as serious as mentioned above. But he was still Shane Warne and no matter what went on in his life, he was always our hero when he had a cricket ball in his hand.

Bernard Tomic is going through this now. There was always talk about him being a spoilt brat, but until we read about the trouble he was getting in and the petulant comments he made, many fans focused on the fact that he could be the next great Aussie tennis player. However as his play went downhill and his off court antics got worse, he finally had to deal with the damage to his reputation.

So far in 2013 his play has improved dramatically. That alone will go a long way to helping his reputation, simply because people love winners, but if his tennis doesn’t live up to his antics watch how quickly we turn on him.

Sport is a bizarre world. When it suits us we like to only care about what happens on the field, as evidenced by how we can forgive athletes as long as they perform. However, we are also quick to jump down their throats when they let us down or lie to us. At the end of the day, we don’t know these people personally and can only judge them on their words and actions. In normal life, we care about things like how nice someone is to us and how they treat those we care about. When it comes to athletes and other public figures, we don’t have that luxury so all we are left with is trial by media.

Lance Armstrong seems like a pretty deplorable person. I’m sure he loves his kids and all that stuff, but he has never seemed likable and I don’t think it’s rash to judge him based on what we know. However, we should never stop asking ourselves why some people get scrutiny over others and whether it is always deserved.

It’s a Man’s World

Lauren Jackson competing at the 2012 Olympics

I read a headline today that turned out to be about something entirely different, however it got me thinking. The story was about how dual football and cricket international Ellyse Perry will have to choose between playing for Sydney FC in football or NSW in cricket this week when their matches clash. However the headline to get you to click on the story related to how Perry wants to compete against men. I’m sure she has mentioned this in the past, but it was nowhere to be found in the story itself.

Nonetheless, the issue of women competing in male sports fascinates me. Women’s sports obviously have rules preventing men from competing in them; however many male sports do not expressly have such rules preventing women. For the most part it is an issue that has never come up and obviously the woman competing in the male sport would not be at an unfair advantage as a man would if he tried to enter the women’s game.

I admit that it’s hard for me to have the perspective and insight on this topic that a woman would have and I would love to get the opinion of as many women as possible in the comments, but I will do my best to share my thoughts on an issue that I think will come up more and more in the future.

The sports in which it is easiest for a female to compete against men are obviously those where technically the sport is individual rather than in direct physical competition. Women compete against men in equestrian and horse racing all the time and recently we have seen women, such as Annika Sorenstam, get invited to compete in some golf tournaments, but they have yet to truly be competitive at that level due to the different tees and course set up.

Danica Patrick has become a famous example, but is not the only female to compete in motorsport against men and she has now moved on from Indy Car to NASCAR where she is certainly competitive. Again these are examples of sports that are technically individually based even if they are driving on the track at the same time.

Outside of the famous Billie Jean King exhibition match against an already retired Bobby Riggs, we haven’t really seen the top female competitors compete against men in direct competition sports, at least not in modern times.

I think that if we are to see women competing against men directly in the future it will have to start in a sport such as tennis, following on from Billie Jean’s lead and where they already compete in mixed doubles. For years people have speculated about whether Serena and Venus Williams would be competitive on the men’s circuit and whilst none of us can claim to know with certainty how they would do, our suspicions cannot be answered unless we get to see it.

But is it in their interests to try?

Women’s tennis, unlike most sports, actually has great earning potential simply by staying on the women’s tour. The prize money in tournaments along with the sponsorship money available means that it is not financially in their interests to compete against men, when it is reasonable to expect that even if competitive, they wouldn’t advance as far as they could against women.

Not only that, but should they try and fail miserably, it would potentially be damaging to their careers even if it shouldn’t be. The speculation as to whether they could compete is potentially better than trying and answering the question in the negative.

But what if they tried and succeeded? Say Serena Williams entered the men’s draw for the 2013 US Open and made it to the 3^rd round before losing to a seeded opponent. Would that not be one of the most amazing and inspiring events in sports history, not to mention move Serena to another stratosphere in terms of success and sponsorship dollars?

Some would argue that allowing her entry as a marketing play is taking away a spot from a man who can’t then turn around and go take her spot against the women. But if she is deserving of the spot and is truly one of the best 128 players in the World, regardless of gender, I think she deserves the opportunity. In a sense, without giving the opportunity to find out, we can’t know whether someone actually deserved the opportunity in the first place.

That’s just tennis though, which is a one on one sport without physical contact. What if a woman were to try to compete against men in a sport with physical contact?

I can’t see a day where women compete against men in actual contact sports like rugby but what about a non-contact sport like basketball?

Basketball is technically a non-contact sport (by rule), but is certainly very physical. I would never suggest a woman would be able to compete at the NBA level, but what about if Lauren Jackson or Liz Cambage tried to play in the NBL here in Australia? First of all it would be an amazing story and much needed publicity for the league, whilst giving the opportunity to a woman to earn more than they can in the women’s game. Obviously it would require a player considered tall in the women’s game as they would only be considered mid-sized in the men’s game, so someone like Jackson makes sense.

But could she do it and acquit herself well? I honestly believe she could be a decent bench player as a shooting guard in the men’s game, at least on offence, if given the chance. However, I have serious doubts about whether a woman would be able to defend in the men’s game, as opposing teams would look to target and take advantage of the athleticism gap. A 6’5” man who is used to being a perimeter player would likely blow past a 6’5” female used to being a centre. But I’d love to see Jackson or Cambage or even Baylor University star Brittney Griner, give it a shot.

Cricket is another sport where I think seeing a woman attempt to compete would be fascinating and have a shot at succeeding. The only real issue is whether or not the pace of the fast bowling would simply be too much. If Ellyse Perry or any other female cricketer aspired to play in the men’s game, as long as they could handle the much faster bowling, then I don’t see why they couldn’t make it work. To make it happen I’d imagine they would first need to try and play in a club level match before maybe having a go in the Ryobi Cup.

Again, I doubt the female competitor would reach the level of making the Australian Men’s team, much like I doubt a female basketballer would compete in the NBA, but if they were capable of competing in the domestic competition and earning the money and success that came along with that, then I am all for it. That being said, my doubts are simply my own personal doubts and without the opportunity, we will never know. A female spin bowler could show up and be as good as Shane Warne and end up being an all-time great regardless of gender.

Women’s sports are never going to generate as much revenue as the men do and so the earning potential for females is always going to be lower in sport (tennis excluded); however should one woman in any particular sport be so good that they could have the opportunity to compete against the men and earn the money the men earn, then they should be allowed to.

If nothing else, they would be an inspiration to the next generation of women, whether they were trying to follow in their athletic footsteps or simply entering a career where men still make disproportionate incomes compared to their female colleagues.