League World Cup: What the Aussie media are saying
By Steve Boughey
Kiwis 34 Kangaroos 20
For some reason, the Australian sports writers prefer to talk about cricket this morning, rather than their beloved rugby league.
Funny, that.
Conspiracy claims and rumours of coach Ricky Stuart's imminent departure dominated the Sydney Morning Herald's league coverage.
The paper talks of Stuart's role in overseeing "the most stunning shock defeat in rugby league's centenary year".
"Kangaroos coach Ricky Stuart was so incensed by the shock loss of his team to New Zealand in Saturday night's World Cup final he verbally attacked ARL chief executive and close friend Geoff Carr, alleging a conspiracy by tournament organisers", the SMH reports.
Conspiracy?
Stuart is understood to have taken particular exception to a number of refereeing decisions that proved costly to his team. He made accusations that the Australian loss was orchestrated by the match officials because it "suited the organisers and the future of the World Cup", the paper states.
Up until the final, the tournament had been written off as a one-horse race after the Kangaroos' crushing defeats of the Kiwis, England, Papua New Guinea and Fiji.
Carr said that despite the loss, Stuart would be supported if he wanted to retain the Australian coaching position.
"He has only had the one defeat and most of this campaign was very, very strong," Carr said yesterday.
The big loss, the national mourning, the rationalisation by selectors of "only the one defeat" ... rugby fans may smile at the parallels between Ricky Stuart's current situation and the clamour surrounding coach Graham Henry after a certain All Blacks match in 2007.
The SMH coverage did include publishing some comments by a leading Australian player who was feeling more gracious towards his transtasman neighbours than Stuart.
"It was the game of the year", former Broncos hard man Gordon Tallis told the paper.
"I hate seeing Australia get beaten, but sometimes the greats have got to be sacrificed for a bigger view. It was one of the biggest upsets in sporting history."
The Australia-based rugby league addicts' website www.rleague.com featured plenty of fulsome praise for the New Zealand XIII's efforts.
Fuelled by reader-submitted contributing articles, the website understandably waxed lyrical about the cinderella Kiwis team's victory:
"As the final siren drew closer in an epic Rugby League World Cup final my thoughts drifted back to my father who had passed on 11 years ago and a host of other rugby league people who have fought tooth and nail for the game in New Zealand", wrote Ian Stewart.
"The hard work of so many people had finally come home to roost."
Then the article took on a definite edginess:
" ...I thought of the hard yards that were done in South Auckland to get the game going in schools. The disdain in which the way the game in New Zealand was/is treated by our opponents. Years of being scorned by other codes who enjoyed a lot more success on a year by year basis, but who still failed to win the big one despite massive amounts of money being injected into them."
The tabloid Sydney Daily Telegraph has already moved on from Saturday night's massacre in its league coverage, and is this morning talking about a League v Union spectacle between the Kangaroos and the Wallabies, pencilled in for ANZ Stadium next October.
"The prospect of watching Matt Giteau taking on Darren Lockyer, Stirling Mortlock against Greg Inglis and the like would cause unprecedented interest among Australian sports fans", writes the Telegraph.
"The blockbuster will generate an estimated A$15 million, while promoters have promised A$2 million to a children's hospital."
The paper goes on to laud the hybrid clash as potentially "biggest event since the Sydney Olympics in 2000".
That line deserves a Tui billboard.
In another story, the Telegraph quite rightly points out the folly of the awarding of the Man of the Match award on Saturday night to Australia's Darren Lockyer.
Lockyer played up to his usual stellar level, admittedly - but the sad fact remains that his side lost.
The problem arose, says the Telegraph, because the selection panel had to make their decision at at match's 70 minute mark (10 minutes before the end of play) - and at that time, the result was still in the balance.
In the US, sports always name an 'MVP' award at the conclusion of a game - but it is, without exception, a member of the winning side.
Had the MoTM selectors adopted this policy, the paper states, Kiwis players Adam Blair, Nathan Cayless, Sam Rapira, Jeremy Smith, Lance Hohaia and Nathan Fien would definitely have been among the contenders for Man of the Match.
ABC News Australia is reporting today that the Kiwis desperately want to hang on to the services of advisor - and honorary New Zealander for the night - Wayne Bennett.
"I would love to see him continue," Kiwi superstar Benji Marshall told ABC.
"He's been a great influence on the team and he commands a lot of respect."
Ex-player and media darling Matthew Ridge made headlines here last week when he called for the Kiwis management to axe Bennett as coach Stephen Kearney's assistant, claiming "we don't need an Aussie brains trust to win a World Cup".
Ridge's words are ringing pretty hollow now, especially with this story of the players' wholehearted endorsement of the involvement of the former Brisbane Broncos mastermind.
Marshall credited Bennett with bringing "discipline" and "a sense of self-belief" into the Kiwis camp.
Also in the ABC article, recently retired Kiwi leader Ruben Wiki, who captained New Zealand against Bennett's Kangaroos in Australia's last major international loss in England in 2005, backed up Marshall's stance.
"Wayne Bennett and Stephen Kearney make a great team", he said, noting the complementary nature of their roles in the team's build-up.[/b]
Funny article. The Kiwis are being quite gracious about it, while Ricky Stuart, by all reports is not. I can understand the frustration with Lockyer being award MOTM...the selectors by all rights is the game was still up in the air, had someone from each side selected and then awarded it to whoever was on the winning team.
The talk of the League v Union match has seen some light on other media sources, and while it would be a very interesting match...and one that I think would get huge attendance, and huge tv ratings...merely out of curiosity.
