I HAVE a couple of former colleagues, both now in their eighth decade, who lang syne re-located from Greater Glasgow to God's Waiting Room, as the Clyde Coast is known in some parts. Both were old-fashioned hot-metal men, foot-in-the-door journalists of the old school, who toiled long, hard and well at the coal-face of Scottish sports journalism.
These guys love print journalism, not for them newspaper websites, they need the smell of fresh ink and perhaps a modicum of residue coming off on their fingers as they read their papers - from the back - of a morning.
Sadly, this joyous, ease-myself-in start to the day is now denied them. Their good ladies having decreed that neither be allowed to read the paper, particularly the formerly-esteemed Glasgow-based broadsheet where once their by-lines were a daily feature, until after lunch time.
Apparently, the decline in standards of reporting and lay-out, the dumbing-down of the paper's output was driving both gentlemen to such lengths that their blood pressure was going through the roof. Today, suitably calmed by a lunch-time pre-prandial, they can be trusted to read the paper without risk of turning into two Incredible Hulks.
I know where their good ladies are coming from and can sympathise, for, with one or two rare exceptions - young Grant at the Herald, Patullo and Ferguson across at Holyrood Road and Dougie Alexander at the Sunday Times (Scotland), plus a couple of others whom I will not mention for fear of turning their heads, today's sports writing storm troopers are a callow lot.
Of course, they are not totally to blame. I blame newspaper executives whose response to the rise of on-line journalism this past decade has been, if anything, marginally worse than that of the Scottish Rugby Union to professionalism.
Can somebody please tell me why - after the wall-to-wall television and radio coverage which top-flight professional sport receives in this country today, newspapers still feel it necessary to come-out with traditional-style reports, being read some 10 to 12 hours after the same game has been seen on television or broadcast on radio?
Newspapers' advantage these days is in the fact they can give the in-depth analysis which the immediacy of radio and television cannot match - they should be making more use of this advantage, and less of putting into words what we have already seen in pictures.
But, you see very little in the way of in-depth analysis on our pages. Instead, increasingly we are "treated" to the thoughts and opinions of retired internationalists, a breed of men who, with the notable exception of the wonderful Brian Moore at the Daily Telegraph, seem determined not to rock the boat by being critical of their on-field successors.
This trait in journalism comment is currently being seen at its worse in the "dead days" of the Lions Tour, when we are subjected to the thoughts and opinions of a raft of former Lions, including Gavin Hastings, who are: "writing as an ambassador for" the bank I refuse to name which is the Lions' main jersey sponsor.
It's a nice wee earner for Gav and his old mates, but, their opinions add little to man's quest for knowledge - for the simple fact, by accepting the bank's ambassadorial role, they have lost their independence. Gav and Co cannot, dare not, say what needs to be said: which is - Gatland and Co have fucked things up big style.
Sure, Gavin today is calling for Stuart Hogg to be introduced for the crucial final Test on Saturday. Won't happen; to bring-in the Jocks would be a case of Gatland admitting he has got it wrong, and that will not happen.
What I think needs to be said is: "Andy Irvine, you're supposed to be managing the tour, why don't you manage and bring your coaches to heel - knock some heads together".
The blessed Andy seems above and immune from criticism. I accept the Lions manager's role these days is largely ceremonial, real power is vested in the coach. However, I feel real Lions managers such as Willie John McBride or Ian McGeechan would have sorted out Gatland and his co-coaches about three games ago.
The bish, bash, bosh Anglo-Welsh style wasn't working - that much was obvious in the First Test; it should have been changed, but, I fear, it's too-late now.
I reckon the best plan for the four Scots on the tour is to get injured in training and out of the Third Test reckoning - then they can come home and say, in all honestly: "Wasn't our fault gov; nothing to do with us", while preparing for a Scottish Six Nations win in 2014 to stick it to the Anglo-Welsh coterie who got us into this mess.
No comments:
Post a Comment