Wrong tour offers Moore frustration

original link

UNDER normal circumstances, Stephen Moore would be delighted to test his scrummaging prowess against the powerhouse packs from the pampas, but not when his tour of Argentina comes at the expense of a Wallabies tour of Europe.

In one of their most stunning decisions of the year, Australia’s selectors have stood down the 22-year-old Queensland hooker from the Wallabies’ November tour to France, England, Ireland and Wales. The campaign has widely been sold as a developmental tour targeting emerging young talent earmarked for the 2007 World Cup.

Instead, Moore will depart next week for the Reds’ four-match tour of Argentina, on which he admittedly can expect more game time than he would have received from Wallabies coach Eddie Jones in Europe. And after a year in which he has started just seven Super 12 games and two club matches and logged just 40 minutes of rugby over his five-Test international career, there is no doubt game time is what the hugely talented hooker needs more than anything.

“Steve will play in at least two of our games on tour,” Reds coach Jeff Miller confirmed yesterday. “But while I’m delighted Queensland will have use of him on tour, I am very disappointed that he is not going away with the Wallabies.

“I don’t think he has done anything to deserve not to go. His potential is unlimited. He can become one of our greatest hookers but for that to happen he just needs to play football. This was the time to give him a starting role. I know the Wallabies are under pressure to win games overseas but if we’re looking for new young players coming through, now was the time to give Steve his chance.”

With the Wallabies having lost their past five Tests and soon to meet France in the bearpit at Marseille and England at Twickenham at the start of their tour, the urgent need to begin experimenting with new talent clearly has been outweighed by the even more pressing need to arrest the worst slide of the past 36 years.

The ugly run of recent defeats may have cost Moore his touring position.

Under less precarious circumstances, the selectors might have been inclined to choose one experienced veteran - Brendan Cannon in the absence of Jeremy Paul, who has been given the summer off to rebuild after a persistent run of injuries - and two young tyros, Moore and Australian under-21 hooker Tatafu Polota-Nau.

But with old heads sorely needed, Waratahs hooker Adam Freier looks certain to be named in the touring party, either in the main Wallabies body or as one of the eight players earmarked just for the Australia A game against the French Barbarians in Bordeaux on November 1. The 113kg Polota-Nau has nudged ahead of 112kg Moore in the race to be the “next big thing” in the Australian front row.

Moore must be feeling a little like Grant Hackett did when he won the first major international title of his career, the 400m freestyle at the 1997 Pan Pacs in Fukuoka. Even as the then 17-year-old was stepping on to the top rung of the dais, he already was looking over his shoulder at the 15-year-old waiting to receive the silver medal, one Ian Thorpe.

Polota-Nau is two years younger than Moore but if it is generational change the Australian selectors are seeking, they might well pass over the Queenslander and place their money on the brilliant young Waratah who yesterday was named as one of three finalists for the International Rugby Board’s under-21 Player of the Year.

Moore, to his credit, is not allowing the first setback of his career to unsettle him. “Obviously I’m disappointed not to be going away with the Wallabies but I’m looking forward to the Queensland tour and the chance to try out a few new things I’ve learnt from Alex Evans (the Reds’ forwards coach),” Moore said.

Thorpe rediscovers competitive spirit

original link

Champion swimmer Ian Thorpe is back in training after taking a 12-month break from the sport.

Thorpe elected to bypass this year’s world championships for a rest which he says has reignited his passion for swimming.

“Two years ago I probably waned a little bit, it wasn’t the same, and I hadn’t been as excited about what I can do in the pool,” he said.

But Thorpe is now looking forward to returning to competitive swimming, with next year’s Commonwealth Games his first major event.

Thorpe is yet to decide on his Commonwealth Games schedule but said he intended to focus on the shorter events.

The Olympic champion’s recent absence from international competition enabled rival and friend Grant Hackett to win Thorpe’s signature event - the 400 metres freestyle - at this year’s world championships in Montreal.

But despite losing his 400m crown, Thorpe said he was unsure if he would compete against Hackett in Melbourne.

“I haven’t determined which events I will swim. I intend to swim the 100 and 200 freestyle. Whether I swim the 400, I’m not sure, and the same with the 50,” he said.

The Commonwealth Games will take place in Melbourne from March 15-26.

Immune supplement claims questioned

original link

Doubts have been cast over the claims made about a new supplement being marketed for its effect on the immune system.

BioSource Immune Plus contains GlycomaxTM Lactoferrin, a glycoprotein found in the whey protein of cow’s milk. The manufacturer claims it supplements the body’s naturally produced lactoferrin, thereby supporting and promoting immune function and wellbeing.

Olympic swimmer Grant Hackett, who helped launch the product last month, has endorsed it and claims to use it to supplement his immune system during training.

However, Associate Professor Connie Katelaris, a senior consultant in clinical immunology and allergy at Sydney’s Westmead Hospital, said although lactoferrin had known physiological effects, there were no data for its use as a therapeutic substance.

Professor Katelaris said there had been two published studies of lactoferrin in humans, both using healthy volunteers, and neither had backed up the claims of the product.

“Lactoferrin is very interesting [but] the doubt is whether you can then take it, put it in a capsule … and have these far-reaching effects,” she said. “That is not to say it is not worthy of further study, it is just that there is nothing with which to back up claims at present.”

However, Mr Rudi Ganter, a director of Probiotec, which developed the product, defended Immune Plus, saying there had been numerous studies on humans.

He said the firm’s own human clinical trial data would be published soon. It examined the substance’s antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and immune response, with positive results, he said.

Sports stars are role models, whichever way you spin it

original link

Can our sporting stars be rich, famous and virtuous?

Why should we expect sharp vision and strong, well co-ordinated limbs to produce model human beings?

What do we expect from our sportsmen and women and are they delivering it?

The short answer is we should expect our sporting heroes to act in an honourable way because they represent their country, accept the huge pay packets and adulation that go with sporting excellence, and most importantly, because they are role models for younger generations. They carry the aspirations of a nation whenever they run out onto a sporting field - at home or abroad. They are our idols. Because of these things, they voluntarily place themselves in a special category of national hero. We expect of them the same excellence in behaviour off the field (or golf course, tennis court, or wherever) as they demonstrate on it.

Are our sportsmen and women delivering? The vast majority - yes, but an unhealthy minority - no.

The case for “I just want to be remembered as a sportsperson,” was put recently by 2004 AFL Brownlow medallist, Chris Judd of the West Coast Eagles). He said he wanted to be known as a “good footballer - nothing more, nothing less”. Sorry Chris, it doesn’t work that way.

What does it say about cricket lovers in Australia (and increasingly, however begrudgingly, their counterparts in England during the current Ashes Test series) when Shane Warne is revered for his outstanding achievements on the cricket pitch with scant reference to his actions off the field?

The apologists for Warne (and other sporting “heroes”) would have you believe he doesn’t deserve the treatment he receives from sections of the media, like the British tabloids. Why not? Because Warne’s defenders insist that sporting heroes are simply that - people who excel on a sporting field who should be admired for that, and that alone. However, it’s exactly because he is a national hero that young people might follow his example in more than just taking up spin bowling. They may believe that his behaviour (and that of others) off the field is acceptable.

The day I was asked to offer my opinion on this topic, Warne, who probably most closely typifies the best and the worst qualities in our sporting heroes, wrote himself into the cricketing history books as the first bowler to take 600 Test wickets.

The next day, on its website, the Sydney Morning Herald labelled its link to a commentary piece by The Telegraph reporter Michael Henderson, with his opening line: “Shane, all is forgiven.” (August 12, 2005) It contained the following sentence that typifies the attitude of many to the consistently wayward Warne:

The injuries, weight problems, drugs bans, associations with bookmakers, hair styles, indiscrete text messages and the separation from his wife, Simone, all paled against this moment.

Did they? Maybe for that moment but surely not for long.

You could add to that litany of indiscretions the controversy over giving up smoking, the so-called “Joe the cameraman” affair and a long list of temporary lovers.

Others have not been as charitable. In the Sydney Morning Herald, a few weeks earlier, on the eve of the spinner’s marriage break-up, staff writer Paul Sheehan suggested Warne “should never again be allowed to debase the Australian colours by wearing them”. He described him as “a spinner in every way” and “a proven, serial, reckless, inveterate liar” (July 4, 2005).

But there he was at Old Trafford in Manchester on the opening day of the second Ashes Test, on August 11, 2005, holding aloft the ball to the adoration of the English crowd after dismissing English opener Marcus Trescothick. Then came the poignant moment when he kissed a white band on his wrist - a gift from his daughter. What the crowd was applauding was an outstanding sporting moment.

A day or so earlier, at the height of the hype after Australia’s two-run loss to England in the second Test, Warne, in talking up his chances for Old Trafford, suggested he would turn down a beautiful woman to be able to bowl a few more balls like the famous “ball of the century”, his first delivery in England in 1993 that bamboozled batsman Mike Gatting (Gold Coast Bulletin, August 3, 2005). The apologists would have you believe that it’s part of the larrikin that is Shane Warne.

I’m not only picking on Warne. He’s no orphan when it comes to sexual indiscretions by sports stars. Remember the furore surrounding former AFL Kangaroos captain Wayne Carey being caught having an affair with a team mate’s wife? Or the controversy surrounding the alleged rape of a woman at Coffs Harbour by some members of the Sydney Bulldogs rugby league team? Or the behaviour of a member of Britain’s sporting “royal family”, David Beckham?

And there are not only sexual indiscretions. How widely do you want to interpret “being virtuous”? Where does cheating rate? Or taking drugs? Or unacceptable behaviour in a nightclub either at home or while on tour interstate or overseas? Recall the performance of several of the Wallabies at a nightclub in South Africa recently that led to one being sent home in disgrace? As I polished the initial draft of this piece near the end of August 2005, the national broadcaster was reporting that two St George Illawarra rugby league players had been fined for “inappropriate behaviour” at a hotel in Wollongong (August 29, 2005).

The papers and tabloid television programs seem to be filled with sports stars’ indiscretions. That might seem an exaggeration, but few things will get politics off the front pages as fast as a sporting story and while often it involves an outstanding performance by an individual or team, equally, we continue to read about our sporting idols’ indiscretions.

There are many thousands of sportspeople who seem to be able to control their hormones. Or do they? Maybe they are just more discrete about their behaviour off the sporting field. Maybe they are not that famous that the opposite sex flocks around them and then runs to the tabloid papers and current affairs programs to cash in on their new-found fame by association.

The apologists for our wayward sporting icons blame the media for the unwanted attention.

Perhaps the question is not “Can our sporting stars be rich, famous and virtuous?” It should be: “Why shouldn’t they be?”

Part of the argument centres on the public lives of celebrities. Sporting icons are celebrities - they are paid extremely well for their achievements and some might suggest they have too much time on their hands. As an example, a golfer who wins a tournament in the United States can earn more in four days than the average Australian takes home from more than 20 years of nine-to-five toil.

As celebrities, the lives of sporting heroes are public property. Their adoring fans can’t get enough of them. There are rows of sports magazines in your local newsagency. We give each other sports books for birthdays and Christmas gifts. The media chronicles their every move. They cease to have a private life but they are paid handsomely for all the attention both on and off the field. (When I “googled” “Chris Judd” to find his online column about just wanting to be remembered as a footballer, two of the other websites thrown up offered - at a price - memorabilia associated with his Brownlow win.)

So a privileged life of fame and fortune comes at a price - the price of privacy.

No sporting success comes without enormous effort and sacrifice. Reaching the top in any sport is not easy. Think for a moment of the hours and hours of training Grant Hackett has put in over the years to remain a world champion and the mighty effort he needed to win gold at the Athens Olympics with lung problems. There’s someone who’s rich and famous, and scandal-free. When he’s on the front pages it’s for outstanding achievements, like being unbeaten over 1,500 metres for 9 years (The Courier-Mail, August 2, 2005).

What do we expect from our sportsmen and women? We expect them to represent Australia to the best of their ability, to compete honestly, and to behave in an acceptable way. We don’t expect to have to keep making excuses for them.

When Warne was banned from cricket for 12 months for drug taking in 2003, the Gold Coast Bulletin captured the mood of the time with the page 1 headline, “Will we forgive him … again” (February 12, 2003). It appears so, for those who argue that what happens “off the field” should stay “off the field”.

But why should we forgive them? What kind of role models do the likes of Shane Warne, Wayne Carey, the Bulldogs players, David Beckham and various rugby league and union stars provide for the potential sporting stars of tomorrow? Totally unacceptable ones I would suggest. And while we continue to forgive and forget, we are allowing a few of our sporting greats (the minority of whose private lives leave much to be desired) to continue with their unacceptable behaviour.

Image is (almost) everything

original link

We ask our sporting stars to be many things at once - “the package”. We apparently want them to be successful in their chosen sport, ALL of the time. We also seem to want them to be good role models such that they behave in a manner that seats them comfortably on the moral high ground - ALL of the time.

We don’t want to hear about the details or the reasons why they aren’t perfect. We criticise them for what we see - out of context. If George Gregan’s Wallabies don’t win, then we criticise a selection of Gregan’s personal statistics that support our opinion and question whether he should remain as Wallabies captain. If Ricky Ponting’s team looks like they may lose the Ashes, then we criticise his ability to captain a successful team. We don’t care that any of the remaining 14 or 10 players may not have done their job brilliantly, and we wouldn’t place such scrutiny on “form slumps” if the teams were winning. Never even mind that a win or loss doesn’t occur in a vacuum - there’s always a competitor.

We want perfection.

Don’t we?

But what is perfection? Do we even know what it is we want these people to achieve on and off the sporting arena? And if they ever did attain that elusive perfection would we feel robbed? After all, aren’t the criticism and dissection of performances, and the ability to gloat when our team wins one of the highlights of a “sports fan’s” experience?

Whether or not we believe that a high profile should generate income for athletes, sponsors, investors, punters, media owners and so on, the fact of the matter is it does. Rightly or wrongly, it’s also true that fans and politicians benefit from the success of high profile teams they align themselves with. This benefit may be financial, or it may be emotional. The aura of success and national pride and so on that a win in sport can generate can be and regularly is, exploited by public figures to enhance their own image.

The drawing power lies in the high profile factor, not in the success alone. Anna Kournikova is an example of that. Some success is a necessary ingredient to bring an athlete to the attention of the public and the sponsors, but it isn’t enough on its own.

Quite frankly we barely recognise athletes who just plug away at training and quietly go about winning their events. They need to be controversial or beautiful to be intriguing to us.

Perhaps the power and influence of a sporting hero or heroic team has something to do with “sex sells”, and the idealism of youth and good health. The connotations surely can’t hurt.

Print media headlines claimed Australia even forgave Shane Warne his extra-sporting indiscretions when he claimed his 600th test wicket in the Poms’ own backyard.

Image is perhaps not everything, but it’s an awful lot. An image is what sells - and image is what the public knows. Reality and harsh truths are hidden at least in part, but the public sees an image that is presented to them in a format that may be mistaken for being a candid diary.

Fans want success - but consistent success. An athlete that is too close to perfect, can arouse suspicion and resentment. Look how the public jumped on Grant Hackett’s star performance at the Montreal swimming world championships in July. Headlines were asking us “Ian who?” and questioning whether Hackett was the new Thorpe. Why are we so quick to knock Thorpe off his blocks? There’s room enough up there for both of them, and many more.

In Australia fans can be fickle. We love an athlete one week and hate them the next. We turn feral in a heartbeat. We’re lucky enough to have selective memories too. Fans of Australian tennis can turn against a star like Lleyton Hewitt very quickly when they see him doing what they interpret as misbehaving on court. Most people, if it was put to them, would agree that the psychological aspect of sport is very important, and I know some athletes are at their best when they use psychological motivational cues enthusiastically. Some people don’t view Hewitt’s behaviour as a personal motivator that’s got a bit out of hand - they deride it as plain bad sportsmanship. When Lleyton is quiet, his game tends to suffer. When Jai Taurima was slapping his legs and yelling before a jump, he won the Olympic silver medal. When he was quiet he’d more likely foul his jump.

How does an athlete maintain the rage - so to speak - for long enough to cross the finish line satisfied they’ve left every speck of energy and aggression, motivation and dedication behind it? How can an athlete perform in a way that satisfies the fans AND behave in a way that is perfect as well - all of the time?

I suggest they can’t, because “perfection” in the eyes of the fans is fluid.

There is no shortage of callers to talk back radio, and letters to the editor from sports consumers expressing their disgust at the behaviour of athletes. Why do these people not speak with their hands and feet and turn the television off, or walk out of the ground where the game is being played? If you don’t like it - don’t watch it. Don’t listen to it. That way you are voicing your opinion in the most effective way. Ratings talk.

Or - more likely - sports fans don’t want perfection. Maybe they want something to complain about and criticise. Maybe that is actually an integral part of the sporting experience. If your team loses is it obligatory to blame the referee, the coach, the captain, the team doctor, the out of favour athlete?

What’s the use of going to the footy with your mates if you can’t sit down at the pub afterwards and analyse the mistakes of the players, criticise the way the coaches chose positions or tactics, or even suggest they were wrong to hold a training camp at an unsuitable altitude as if we were altitude experts? What is there to join us in conversation on Monday morning if it isn’t scandals, such as whether or not half the Wallabies should be sacked because they’re too old, or whether the video referee needs to be used more often because the on-field referees are obviously useless?

All one needs to do is sit at a sporting event and listen out for someone from the fabled breed of the “armchair expert”. These people will commentate on the rules, the marking, the positioning, the techniques, and the physical and mental shape of the athletes. Sometimes they’re right, sometimes they’re outrageously wrong. Generally there are others from their breed who may engage with them in a loud debate on the sidelines. That’s ok though, because they contribute to the atmosphere of the event, and they help generate debate - and hence publicity - for their chosen sport.

We need the “armchair experts”, the “sports fans”, and the scandal. We need something besides religion and politics to debate over our beers, lattes, cuppas or sports waters. We need the intrigue, the skill, the blood, sweat and tears, the wins and losses (and the draws), and we need to see that our sporting celebrities aren’t immune to being as human - as we are.

We aren’t paying money to see our sporting heroes win - we’re paying them to entertain us - and that’s a lot bigger picture than a simple on-field performance.

Grant gives coach nod on baton

original link

SWIMMING champion Grant Hackett is hoping to share the spotlight with coach Denis Cotterell at next year’s Melbourne Commonwealth Games.

Hackett, the world record holder and a dual Olympic gold medallist in the 1500m, has nominated his long-time coach to run a leg of the Queen’s Baton Relay.

“When I was asked who I’d like to nominate, he was the first person who came to mind,” Hackett said.

“Coaches like Denis are certainly the unsung heroes in modern sport and that’s what carrying the baton is all about, recognising people who play such a valuable role.”

YOU STILL HAVE TIME TO CHOOSE A RUNNER

THIS is your last chance to nominate yourself, or someone you know, to run a leg of the Queen’s Baton Relay.
By the time the 2006 Commonwealth Games start in Melbourne in March, the baton will have visited all 71 Commonwealth countries and every state, territory and capital city in Australia.
Most of the runners will be chosen through Telstra’s Community Runner Program, and every citizen and permanent resident aged 12 or older on January 25 next year is eligible.
Organisers are asking Sunday Mail readers to help choose those runners by nominating people they consider worthy of the honour.
To nominate someone, just download a form from www.queensbatonrelay.telstra.com or pick up a nomination form from a Telstra shop.
Nominations close on Friday and the names of the runners will be published in The Courier-Mail in November.

Hackett, 25, said he owed much of his sustained success in the pool to Cotterell, his coach of almost two decades.

“When you win a gold medal you have to break your success down to a number of people who have helped along the way and your coach is a big chunk of that,” he said.

Hackett believes the secret to Cotterell’s longevity is his ability to move with the times.

“I’ve been with him since I was six, and for him to have trained me as a junior and taken me throughout my career and to gold medals has been amazing,” he said.

“He is a great teacher and he has been able to constantly adapt his coaching. He’s just so engrossed in the sport.”

Hackett said winning a place in the Queen’s Baton Relay would be a great way to give Cotterell his due recognition.

“It would be great to see him have the chance,” he said.

“I’m sure it would be something he would treasure and it would be great to see him get some public recognition.”

Hackett mantra: where there’s a will there’s a whey

original link

Grant Hackett has not yet gone the wacky route of British marathon champion Paula Radcliffe, but he appears to have started on a similar track. This week the star swimmer endorsed a dietary supplement that he says helps his body fight day-to-day illnesses. The product uses pharma-babble to explain, in a most obfuscating way, exactly what it is.

An example: “lactoferrin - a bioactive, multifunctional glycoprotein”. It appears, after research, that Hackett is taking mainly a freeze-dried form of whey powder.

This is disturbing on two fronts. If the product works as the company reckons it does, boasting antioxidant, antibacterial, anti-viral, bio-available iron, and immuno-stimulant properties, then it is far more than a supplement and we would all be gulping it down. It if doesn’t, then Hackett may be paying for an exotic tinge to his urine.

But why is Hackett, one of our most experienced swimmers and most vocal anti-drug campaigners, taking a risk by using such supplements? Everyone from IOC president Jacques Rogge to the AIS nutritionists to WADA officials have warned against taking any type of supplement for fear of contamination and, more importantly, creating a culture of indifference about popping pills.

Hackett says it has nothing to do with performance benefits: he just doesn’t want to battle illness as well as his opponents and he reckons his immune system has benefited hugely.

Yet Hackett’s belief in his transformation from a sickly to superstar swimmer on a manufactured bottle of stuff extracted from cows grazing in the Atherton Tableland in northern Queensland, is not an isolated case.

Olympic champion Cathy Freeman spent thousands of dollars before the Sydney Games on supplements and vitamins from health-food stores. Later on she was revealed to be importing commercial quantities of whey powder.

But that is nothing compared with Swedish golfer Jesper Parnevik, known for golfing nude to help promote his sport, who’s the most barmy regarding diet. He eats volcanic dust to “cleanse out my system”.

Closer to home, the Manly rugby league club attributed its early-season ladder lead to the players eating an extract of French maritime pine-tree bark that is supposed to stop muscle fatigue and reduce build-up of lactic acid. We’re not sure what their diet has been of late as they struggle to remain in the final eight.

And remember the claims of a supplement that delivers a wallop of oxygen in a liquid? Footballers have latched on to it in droves. Mad? Perhaps not. Desperate? Certainly.

Which is why we love those athletes who tip the eating pendulum to the other extreme, such as the fast-food-devouring cyclist Ryan Bayley, for their “normality”. And it is refreshing to hear of Jonah Lomu recall one “Mac Attack” during a hunger pang: two Big Macs, two Quarter Pounders and a lot more.

This week it was reported that Radcliffe, the darling of British athletics, scrutinises everything from her porridge to her compression socks (to reduce vibration in her legs), sports a titanium necklace to reduce stress, and has a rubdown with emu oil while eating low-fat, high-iron ostrich meat.

Radcliffe has even hired a naturopath to “ionise” her food with metal rods, leaving her without wheat, dairy, gluten, tomatoes, coffee and grapes in her diet. And if she is a bit peckish? Don’t be surprised if she borrows a bottle or two of Hackett’s new stuff. According to the blurb, it is free of added sugar, salt, yeast, gluten, starch, lactose, preservatives, artificial colours, flavours and sweeteners.