I recently noticed that a Western Australian football legend has officially been given the status of "legend" by the Western Australian Football League. I wonder if he gets a certificate? Or special parking privileges? Free tickets to the footy? To the symphony? Half-price Carlton Mid(dle Age) for life? The mind boggles as how to properly recognise one so great. And not just great; officially great.
You know, I think these blokes down at kick-to-kick HQ are lateral-thinkers without actually realising it. I mean, I have several mates whom I'd consider to be good blokes. It it weren't for these sobriquet-ascribing trailblazers, it'd never have occurred to me to actually form some sort of club, and present them with a certificate that officially identified them as "good blokes". I'd just have assumed that those who knew them would know this already, and those who didn't know them would simply (and respectfully) not care whether they were good blokes or not.
All organisations seek to enshrine their importance by means of an internal hierarchy. Join a club, climb the ladder. Whether one is President of a nation of President of a chess club, the principle is the same. The use of epithets like "legend" are just a little more nebulous in their status, in that it's never made precisely clear what is required to achieve this status.
I wonder what comes after "legend". "Mythical Being" is a possibility. But I'm more interested in the other end of the spectrum. The conduct of a certain high profile Brisbane Lions recruit - and his rather puerile application of rudimentary IT skills leads me to propose that as well as having ranking categories to which all AFL players - in lieu of a self-directed sense of achievement - would do well to aspire, there probably ought to be labels for the lesser lights, whose conducts and achievements threaten to lead ordinary citizens to question whether or not it was in fact an evolutionary anomaly that enabled them and their ancestors to develop the ability to walk upright.
The rank of "pillock" seems highly appropriate for our little friend at Brisbane. Other useful groupings might include: thug, criminal, misogynist, lunch-cutter, prat, twat, goon, and mug. There could be sub-categories for whingers, malingerers, taggers, scraggers and Dockers.
And I'd like to see these categories established and awarded long before players reach retirement age. Players ought to receive their little commendations (or discommendations) in the form of little ribbons, that can be hung from guernseys during games. It'd be like a cross between an ANZAC march and a primary school athletics carnival. Given the rather flatulent need for self-celebration that seem to drive this sporting need for public self-congratulation, as well as the need to elevate the pain of surviving a high tackle to something akin to trench warfare, I think the analogy is well measured.
I'm sure many who achieve the status of "legend" deserve it. On footballing achievements alone, Garry Ablett Snr is most assured of a place. It's just that he deserves a few of the other, more egregious awards as well. If this is a bit too lateral for the rule-monkeys down at AFL headquarters, then perhaps we can do away entirely with this incessant need to deify our more adroit citizens.
I have one exception: John Worsfold needs to receive an Order of Australia for his shirt-front on Dermott Brereton all those years ago. I'd nominate him for the post of Inaugural Australian President, but unfortunately, Dermott was able to get back up. Alas.
Comments