First I offer a caveat to my deceit. I fully support and stand by any recognition of those who put in time behind the scenes. It doesn’t matter weather or not I think the system is self serving and flawed because any attention given to the people who make it possible for us to play this game should not be shunned. Specifically both Jim and Michael have been nominated and both deserve any amount of praise bestowed upon them. Jim has been steadfast in his support of this club as many know. He continues to be a role model for not only the younger members, but also to his own peers. What many do not recognize is the countless hours Jim has spent being the scenes working on the SCRFU EC for over 10 years. Having spent some time on the board myself I can tell you that Jims efforts alone have kept this Union stitched together, balanced and moving forward where it otherwise would be marred by politic and the self serving interests of players and administrators who put club before Union. Without Jim’s involvement in the SCRFU EC, we as a Union and in turn us as a club would flounder in the dregs of rugby competitiveness. Instead we lead the nation in membership, growth and competition. As with Jim, Michael is an inspiration to most anyone who has spent more than 3 minutes with him. Despite having little to no experience as a rugby administrator or coach, he has managed to lead the club in its greatest moment of growth. He will be the first to shrug it off and lake little credit but as many of us know, it is his leadership and dedication to others that has created the unity and selflessness that excelled us to our successes this last season. These guys are awesome… period.
OK, let’s roll onto the hate. The day we have been waiting for has arrived and you will be shocked to know that I greet it with the same amount of jaded skepticism as I the day they told me that bottled beer taste could be found in a can. No chance. Let us look at some of the nominees:
MVP DIIIMatt Baier (SD Armada RFC), Mark Frazier (Pasadena RFC), Matt Hettermann (Pasadena RFC), Nathaniel Kelly (Finlanders), Vincent McGlade (SOC Gators), Fredrico Novo (Eagle Rock RFC), Barry Williams (San Pedro Rhinos), Brian Wolf (OC Bucks)
Wow. I see a lot of necessary omissions and additions here but I will spare you the pain of my who’s who of D3 rugby. Without going into detail over the current nominees I will simply question the merit of an award whose previous recipients include JP as the Division MVP. Yes… JP folks. Read that again… let it soak… and read it again. It begs the question, what are the Griffin Awards, who came up with this idea, who participates and why is it relevant to you and I? My short answer: who the fuck cares.
I am beginning to be of the opinion that all individual awards given to players on merit of their on-the-field performance should be abolished. Crazy? Maybe but here me out. To highlight individual efforts runs contrary to the spirit of the sport which is that of a commitment to team play and not individual accomplishment. Rugby may be one of the only sports where success is determined by a team’s ability to play together and support each other as one. Not only do stand alone players rarely see themselves excel to greatness; they offer do little to help their own team. How many times have you seen a break-away run go unsupported by a teammate and result in turn over? It happens frequently in lesser clubs and rarely if never in clubs who play to a higher level of play. This is because every good rugby player recognizes that you are only as good as your support. Powerful plays are often set up but 12 other guys who worked twice as hard as the one man who made it into the try zone. Good teams know this, good teams embrace this. Good teams Like Pasadena make this their code of play. Just take a look at the scorers table for our club and I challenge you to tell me where our individual strength is or who our best players are. We have forwards and backs all over the board. Are there stand out scorers? Sure but I am sure they will be the first to tell you that the TEAM put them in the position to score and it was not through individual effort alone. As Rooney likes to put it, “Any monkey can fall over the try line.” The best players on the team are the support players because they know that in the self sacrifice their team will excel. Why then should we brush aside the true beauty of our game, the complete selflessness of it, and practice the act of vanity and individualism for on-the-field play? Total bull shit. Now I am sure there are some out there who will point out that I have in the past been known to hand out many, many awards and that this lengthy diatribe is just more hypocritical froth from a jaded and cynical old boy. Well my friends, I have seen the error of my ways and have chosen the One True Path. No more individual accolades for on the field play. Less is more and knowing you did your part to get your team to stand victorious should be reward enough. Am I saying we should abolish awards like Man-of-the-Match? A large part of me now says yes. The fact is that in any given game, and especially on teams possessing a great many skilled players like ours, there is more than 1 player deserving the recognition. Choosing 1 or 2 of 15 ostracizes the other 13 men who worked just as hard and suffered the same pains- and many more who thanklessly come to practice to make that starting IV as competitive. The only problem I have here is that I like watching people drink and to an even greater extent I enjoy watching people drink and fail. This is a personal crisis of internal conflict I will have to work through but make no mistake; individual awards for on-the-field play are for soccer players, baseball players and women’s field hockey.
One more complaint about the Griffin Awards and weather you agree or disagree with any of the above, I challenge you to formulate a response that would negate the following. Renting facilities, putting it together and god knows how much it is going to cost to bring over Jerry Collins- this all takes financial resource. This in a time when referee’s are at an all time low and can no longer guarantee game coverage in part due to financial hardships, our representative sides have to pay their own way for the “honor” of competition for S. Cal (note: true Griffin sides, NOT this hack Blue all star team), clubs are burdened with increasing operating costs, the list of financial woes goes on. It seems to me that our Union’s time and money could be better spent on supporting other programs that affect the greater membership and not just an elite group of a players representing negligible percentage of our membership. Let’s look at the individual cost to attend the event: Tickets Starting at $85 per-person, Table of ten for $800. Wow. A table of 10 or a new set of jersey’s or perhaps your union dues- which would you choose? A vast number of our member clubs struggle to get their bills paid season to season, month to month. Even with our tremendous financial success these past few seasons, we are included in this group. Those who can afford something like this are just not representational of the majority of Union members thus contribute further to the propagation of the elitism that runs contrary to our sport. Question- do nominee’s have to pay to attend? If yes, then it takes a little wind out of the sails. “Give us $80 and maybe we’ll give you this award”. If nominees don’t pay then it begs the question of whose footing the bill. That’s you and me sister. Now if I knew that “X” amount of the proceeds were going to support some of our programs in need of funding then maybe I could see some benefit but from what I can tell this is not the case. Although I am sure many who vote will not pay to attend, I argue that those who are behind this will make up a great portion of the attendees and that they simply are not representational of the greater membership. It is also a widely publicized fact that they had difficulty just getting nominations which begs the question of who will vote. It seems to me that if it was widely representational and supported by the Union members then getting nominations would not be a problem. So we have a small number of people on a small number of clubs voting for a small number of player from within their own ranks and an even smaller number shelling out massive coin to go and glad hand each other on their tremendous accomplishments. It is the tail that wags the dog. It is a popularity contest just like voting for Prom King and Queen. No thanks. Last year attendance was lack luster and judging by what I have heard there isn’t any reason to think this year will be any different. Sure I like some of the nominees and think they are great. My point here is I would just much rather save the $ and resource and put it to something the greater membership can reap benefit from.
Note that this year the “Ball” will be held on the same day as our Golf Tournament- which would you rather or which will you attend? The fat is in the fire bubba. Choose your path.
UPDATE- please read all comments before responding.
OK, now onto something that you probably care more about. This weeks Celebrity Look-alike
Swan
Slee-Stack
2 comments:
I guess you didn't take that cold shower that I recommended.
Your feelings about doling out individual glory are not entirely without merit; certainly it's a subject for debate on which reasonable people can disagree (personally, I don't really care one way or the other). But some of your comments were more than a bit out of line.
First of all, a man who is a valuable teammate, club member, and friend is likely to win this award. What's the point in pissing all over it before it is given to him?
Secondly, charging admission to the event does not take resources away from clubs. If a member of the SCRFU community wants to attend, that is HIS money that foots the bill, not his club's. The choice is not between a table for 10 and union dues or jerseys. The choice is between admission for one and this month's cable bill or maybe making the kiddies drink powdered milk for awhile instead of the real thing. And how he spends his money is no one's business but his
More importantly, (and this is where you might care to perform a redaction before you have to issue an apology) you are right that nominees have to pay their own way. Last year, they did not. And who footed that bill? Not you, nor me. Rather, the organizer of the Griffin Awards found herself out a significant amount of money. You might think that it serves her right for doing something that elevates the individual over the team, or whatever. But I would hope that someone who drives a minimum of twelve hours each week to coach (quite successfully) a college side and who volunteers a good deal of time for the betterment of Southern California rugby (not just for the Griffin Awards) might perhaps be given just a bit of slack. You know, on the basis of supporting and recognizing "those who put in time behind the scenes."
Maybe the Griffin Awards is a ridiculous idea. On the other hand, maybe you're wrong and it's the Best Thing Ever. Probably it's somewhere in between. But if this sort of vitriol is spewed out anytime someone comes up with and implements a new idea, then you're objectively working to create a system in which nothing new happens and where no one wants to serve.
All good arguments. First regarding the recognition of our members- any recognition that gives outside visibility to our club and players is just fine with me. Mark, Matt, Michael, Jim and I can name many others which is part of the point. As I stated I am still conflicted over awards for individual achievement but I won’t re-hash. You can re-read my original statements and if I knock any of our own players you can tell me where. Should they walk away with an award, which I hope they do, I’ll be there to pat them on the back. My main criticism of the awards themselves is that given the many areas the need assistance in the Union, they are a misdirected use of resources that benefit a small number of people. Additionally, right or wrong, not many Union members care.
First regarding the cost of the awards ceremony. Yes there is a cover charge which is covered buy individual players who have the freedom to spend their dollars however they want. My point is that $80 is a lot of cash and even with only 50 attendees (just picking a number) is 4K. That is $4000 that is going towards awarding a small number of people. Who benefits from this? The recipients who make up a very small minority of member clubs and SCRFU dues paying members. Why not take that same resource and put it towards a fund raiser that benefits the greater membership. And don’t kid yourself; the Union will be paying out something out of pocket for this. It may be a couple hundred bucks but again that is money that I believe is better served going somewhere else. Now it may be possible that there is a fair amount that is sustained by the organizer which is fine but here is my point about resource. If the organizer can tap the resources to generate financial assistance for an awards ceremony, wouldn’t is be a better use of the resources if the organizer instead tapped the resources to assist with other programs or, if the intent is to have an event, how about an event that contributes to a greater need like SCRRS subsidizing, or a fund to assist with field acquisition, or you name it. In a time that cash flow is hindering growth in the Union, it just sees to me to be a waste to spend the time and money to get up and glad hand each other. If you can tell me that the Union will not pay a single dollar out of pocket and that equal resources will be spent on subsidizing other programs within the Union that have a greater effect to the larger membership, then I will gladly rescind all of my comments.
My second issue is in regards to who participates in process. The fact is that a very small number of Union members participate which is substantiated by the fact that they had to extend the nomination deadline just to get enough nominations. This is a pretty big road sign that not many people are paying attention. Disagree with my comments all you want but numbers don’t lie. If there is difficulty getting nominations then logic tells us they will have equal if not similar amount of difficulty getting votes. For good or bad, the Union members aren’t listening. Maybe it is because members don’t see the benefit, are lazy or just don’t care. But the fact that it isn’t a widely participated in program shouldn’t be discounted.
As far as the organizer and her sacrifices to coach and administer, as I stated earlier all props to those who put in the hours to make it possible to play this game. Good on her. Look, I’ve been on both sides of the fence as administrator of a club and administrator of the Union so I appreciate her sacrifices. I’d just like to see some of those efforts and resources re-directed to programs that effect more.
Am I saying the Griffin awards are a bad idea? In theory if awards were given to clubs and individuals for whatever the determined merit with the removal of the individual awards for on the field performance then I would be more apt to support it. If the there was no ceremony (awards given out at SCRFU FGM or AGM which is free to members) or if a portion of the entrance fee was to go towards funding another SCRFU program, then I would be strained to find a critique.
Post a Comment