How twitter made me realise I was wrong.

tumblr_lqideagvib1qlrinq

To paraphrase Pat Benatar ‘Twitter is a battlefield’

It has become from a place where people just twitted things like ‘It’s a nice day today!’ to changing political landscapes and ultimately the favourite method of communication for the current president of the United States.

People have lost jobs over tweets  (hello Scott McIntyre and Catherine Deveny) so while I am addicted there is always the danger that I may tweet something really inappropriate.

Faux pas or stupid statements that once could be limited at the pub or family dinners now can be retweeted and commented worldwide in matters of minutes, all from the comfort of your own phone.

But while twitter can amplify your own belief and prejudices in a social media bubble, in some cases can show you that you were wrong.

A case in point was last Saturday night during the A-League Sydney derby.  I was …ahem..watching it from my computer (wink wink) and following twitter at the same time.  And I saw this.

I don’t know why but I thought that the figure was Donald Trump (which in the light of things makes me look even more stupid) and that the Sydney Western Wanderers RBB were making a (albeit rude) political statement.

Perhaps it was reading both anti-Trumps and football tweets at the same time that made me make that assumption.  The RBB have made lefty statements before. Anyway I tweeted:

As the night went on people tweeted their disapproval.  Maybe they were too sensitive?  But it was a tweeter thread by Anna Harrington made me see something that I should have realised, that whether that figure was Trump or Arnie, the banner had homophobic connotations, and I was wrong in expressing my approval.

I think Anna makes the case much better than I could.  So I will just put her thread here.

 

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

How to position the #Wleague where it belongs

wleaguefinal

I really wasn’t going to write this post.  The argument of how Association Football is positioned in the sporting landscape has been done to death.  In this blog and also by people much more knowledgeable than myself.

But what prompted me to write this post was this morning’s edition of the ABC’ sport program ‘Offsiders’.

As I have written in this blog before I had to suppress my code wars instincts, and really say that the advent of the Women AFL is great for women’s sport in general. And perhaps think that if you have to invite people on the show you can’t invite a representative from every sport.

However the narrative amongst many football and non football alike is that the Women’s AFL competition has not only overtaken the WLeague in popularity.  A journalist also ventured that it could affect the A-League.

As we football fans are quite hyper sensitive to what we perceive attacks on our code Davutovic copped a lot of flack for that article, especially writing for a newspaper that is perceived to be very pro AFL and anti-football here in Melbourne. But Matildas Melissa Barbieri wrote similar things back in June.

But perhaps the reaction was because it provoked our frustration towards the FFA. A feeling that perhaps they got complacent thinking that summer was football’s patch, and that cricket would lull along with a few tests and one dayers and that we wouldn’t have to worry about footy until March.

But this was foolish in such a competitive sport environment such as Australia.  Cricket wasn’t going to give up its number one summer sport position easily and they hit back with the Big Bash League, while the AFL marketed its women’s competition brilliantly.  And to those in NSW and Queensland who may have been surprised by the success of this competition in Victoria and other Aussie Rules states,  you may not realise how popular aussie rules is among women.  It is no surprise to me that an AFL sponsored competition is such a success.  Writer  Clare Write spoke to the launch of Angela Pippos’ book: Breaking the Mould: Taking a Hammer to Sexism in Sport.  And this passage is telling.

Ange documents many other women who have similarly campaigned — generally quietly, behind the scenes — so that my daughter can not only pull on the guernsey and footy boots like her brother before…..

Thank you for the fact that when I went to the Carlton-Melbourne game at Princes Park last week, I saw a mum say to her young daughter after the match: “You could be a full forward one day, Ella”.

Thank you for the fact that Ella got to sit in a crowd and watch thousands of men and boys, as well as other women and girls, clap and cheer the 32 women slogging it out on the field.

Thank you for the fact that this book will be part of the process of change, so that, as you write, Ella’s “world will be bursting with possibilities” because “stop signs don’t exist there”.

That passage tells a lot why for some of us blokes it seems that the reporting of Women’s AFL feels like they invented women’s sport.

To which Angela replied:

And that’s the nub of the issue.  Many women and young girls  in Victoria and other AFL states love the footy and now they feel that they can play it too and watch other women play it.  This presents a challenge, but it is also an opportunity to give the W-League more prominence.

What can the W-League do? – Differentiation

Go to new markets – expansion in new areas.

When the FFA talks about expansion they talk about going where the fish are, which in the main are capital cities.  That’s understandable because that’s where people live and derbies create interest and TV ratings.

The problem with that is that capital cities is also where other sport mainly operates and the competition is at its fiercest.

Would expansion to regional centres be an answer?  While this argument works for the A-League it is even more relevant for Women’s football.  Let’s take Tasmania.  The AFL has abandoned the idea of placing a team there and as Michael Cockerill has written  this gives a great opportunity for the A League to move into the breach.  But this could be even more for women football.  While the AFLW represent only teams which are in the mainland, imagine a W-League Tasmanian team.  Tasmanian women representing their state in a national competition.  AFLW doesn’t and Super Netball doesn’t.  That would be an opportunity to stand out.  This is already done with Canberra United but I think would get more attention in a state like Tasmania, but also in places like Woolongong for instance.

Highlight W-League as a league of its own….not as a precursor to the men’s

While as I have written before I try to eschew code wars, I recognise that heck, it is a really competitive environment out there.  While us fans can say ‘we like many codes’ or ‘all sports can co-exist’ which is true in our mind, the reality of the market is that resources such as sponsorship money and the best athletes can’t be distributed equally.

A lot of the marketing about the W-League has been that finally the AFL has created an competition for women.  But at this stage is a still a bit of a sideshow before the men competition starts.

This was stated by journalist Georgina Robinson on Offsiders.

So while we talk about equality, the FFA could highlight the fact that the W-League is not a ‘pre-season product’ but a fully fledged separate competition from the men’s.  The FFA should’t be all guns blazing about it, but perhaps mentioning it as a point of difference, especially considering the AFL media has been quite overt in defining the AFLW and a watershed for women’s sport.

Football as the world’s game.

One advantage that football has over other sports and codes in Australia is its international dimension.

I would suspect that only basketball would be on equal terms with football on this aspect.  Netball and cricket are also international sport but the number of countries which are competitive are not as many.

The fact that the Matildas have played so little in Australia is a bit of an indictment.  Not sure with the scheduling etc. but I am sure that a few friendlies in Australia, especially if played in smaller centres would attract attention and if marketed properly would increase the profile of the players and women’s football. The idea of bidding for the 2023 World Cup would be a great start.

It seems that the game is at at a bit of the juncture at the moment.  Expansion, possible promotion relegation down the track, A-League clubs wanting more say.  Let’s bring Women’s football into the mix.  Is too much of an opportunity to miss.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

To beat Trumpism and Hansonism will be hard. But it’s been done before.

Populism is on the march.  So we all read on the news.

I am not going to repeat here what it has been written by many other professional commentators before.  But the common theme is that both Trump and Hanson are ‘anti-establishment’ not part of the ‘political elite’.

One thing I discerned is that while there is a hard rock of islamophobes/xenophobes and general bigots among those who have voted for Trump and Hanson, many who have voted for them are not necessarily so.  They have voted as an expression of feeling left out, of the political class not listening to them.  When you have something like Trump or Hanson that are perceived to be not part of that establishment the vote becomes more an expression of rebellion rather because they are attracted by the policies of those candidates.

While protesting and ‘resistance’ are all well and good, these actions will not motivate people to switch their votes.

What is needed here is to detach those who are not bigots or xenophobes away from those who are and return these ‘alt-right’ candidates to the margins where they belong.

How to do this?  It’s hard, time consuming, and it is a long process, but it has been done before.

If we take an USA example the Obama campaigns were successful because they involved grassroot activities from people who were persistent.  James Ridgeway wrote back in 2008:

Thousands of people sit together in campaign offices, union headquarters and living rooms calling up people they have never met. Thousands more troop through apartment buildings and walk the streets of suburban neighborhoods knocking on the doors of total strangers. Their numbers increase at night, when their own working days are over. Their targets are most likely to be homes, and mobile phone minutes are free. This kind of activity takes place across the US every four years – but never before on this scale. By all estimates, Barack Obama’s campaign is running the largest political field operation in history…..

This kind of campaigning is exhausting, inefficient, time-consuming and expensive. It also works better than anything else does.

I also read an article (that I can’t find) that this people momentum was squandered after Obama took power.  The job was done.  Obama was president and everything was going to be alright.  We have seen with Trump this didn’t happen. Voters became more and more disenchanted. What won the election for Trump was that many voters didn’t turn out to vote.

In Australia there is also this sense of  disenchantment that seems to push voters towards populist candidates.  The bigger danger is that voters’ disenchantment may lead to disregard mainstream media and getting ‘information’ from fake news sources.

But again Hansonism can be beaten if energy is put in to involve people.  I’ve seen this in the 1982 Victorian election where the ALP won government after 30 years of Liberal rule.  The ALP years before organised forums and meetings where interested people, community groups and organisations would be able to discuss and propose ideas.  And some became part of the ALP platform (the Flora and Fauna Guarantee Act was an example).

This gave the government a great sense of connection and engaged the electorate.  Of course, like in the Obama case, once in office this lost momentum. But that is another story.

While the Greens do have a network of communities, a party like the ALP, with its Union membership could cast the net wider and even reach and involve those who are not necessarily ‘Labor’ people.  This would engage the community and make it feel part of the political process, reduce the effectiveness of biased fake news.

This is not as easy as a social media campaign as it involves organising and actively engaging people (although social media can help) and it is a long process.

But if we want to stem the rise of populism it may be the only pathway ahead.

 

 

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

World Cup expansion? Why not. It’s not a competition between best teams anyway.

The football world has been abuzz after the news that from the 2026 tournament, FIFA has voted to expand the World Cup to 48 teams from its current 32.

From what I can gather from twitter the overall response has been negative, especially from Australian fans, which is surprising considering that expansion helped us getting into the World Cup when part of the Asian Confederation.  As Craig Foster stated :

Access to four guaranteed spots also gives us the opportunity to avoid the do or die scenarios of the past, and we grow quickly through three consecutive appearances, the last two being directly secured.

But how did Asia get four and half spots? Through expansion from 24 to 32 teams in 1998 (in 1974, Asia and Oceania had one spot combined; Asia one in 78; three and a half in 98 and four and a half in 2002).

I wonder if the reaction would have been different if this expansion was accepted back when Australia was part of Oceania and we failed to qualify for more than three decades.

The main argument against the expansion is that this is a cynical money grabbing exercise by FIFA, and that may be true.  There are very powerful nations which are putting lots of money in football, especially in Asia, that will finally get a spot.

The other argument, and the one that seems to be the main objection, is that the World Cup should be a meeting of the best teams the planet has to offer, and instead there will be mediocre teams that somehow ‘do not deserve’ to be there.

I am sorry, but this is nonsense.

The World Cup is not like the Olympics where every nation has the possibility to participate.  There is a qualifying process which is already skewed.

The World Cup is not a competition of the best teams in the world.  Is a competition between the best teams from each confederation. And where there are two confederations which have the strongest teams: Europe and South America.

This makes qualification in those two confederations much harder.  Netherlands did not qualify for 1982 world cup while New Zealand did. Argentina may risk qualifying for Russia but we may see Panama there. In all the World Cups Australia failed to qualify arguably there were worse teams than us playing.   There is no level playing field.

The level of football has increased throughout the world and this means that it is unlikely to be really hopeless teams among the 48 teams.

Look at what teams a 48 World Cup would look like according to current rankings.  It’s not bad.  I don’t see many that would be totally overwhelmed.

So let’s have more people at the party.  I think it will be fun.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Italian Referendum. It’s not #Brexit or #Trump

One thing that gets noticed quickly if you are a media junkie like me is that often a narrative arises in reporting an event.  In Australia we had the ‘Howard Battlers’ for some time which really didn’t exist. Now with Brexit and Donald Trump winning the presidency of the United States we have the narrative of ‘the people rebelling against the elite’ and variations of this theme.  This is amplified in social media where people who believe in something feed in this narrative.

After Brexit and Trump, the media went to look for another ‘domino’ to fall. Next was the Austrian election for president who did not fit the narrative as the Green candidate defeated the right wing one.

Next was the Italian Referendum.  I thought that the narrative of attaching anything ‘against the elites’ or the EU was odd to start with.  This election was about changing the constitution to change how the Senate was elected and its function.  There are other changes which are quite detail and not that exciting.  Wikipedia has a good page about it if interested. 

But I already read articles about ‘The next big thing’ to happen after Brexit and Trump and I tweeted this before the results.

And straight after the results the comments in the media were that the result ‘Throws the EU into chaos’.  Basically that’s because the Prime Minister Renzi stated that if the referendum failed he would resign.  Renzi which was not actually elected, but appointed by the President of Italy (considering that Renzi’s party the Partito Democratico has the majority in the lower house).  Renzi was very popular initially but then became very unpopular..very.  And this referendum for many wasn’t much an issue about the reform but a way of voters to get their baseball bats ready for him.

This referendum with its quite dry proposals wouldn’t have had much attention if it was not for the Brexit/Trump narrative.

But beside the media the reaction from the brexiters/pro-Trump in the UK and USA was something to behold.

All I can say is that these people are going to be so disappointed in a few months’ time. Italy is very angry towards Europe. The Euro has really disadvantaged its economy, and some are angry because they believe the EU is not doing enough to help with a refugee crisis they feel Italy has to sort out by itself.

An Opinion poll done just after Brexit,  show that while only 30% has faith in the European Union, 81% is not happy with its immigration policies and 70% view the EU’s political policies negatively, 80% want to stay in the European Union.

Populist parties like the 5 Star Movement may want to do a referendum to get out of the Euro currency, but there’s no talk of completely exiting from the EU like the UK has done.

Italian journalist Beppe Severgnini writes in the New York Times:

Here and abroad, columnists are dashing off dark warnings about the impending collapse of the euro, and maybe the European Union. After Brexit, Rexit! crow his opponents.

Not true. David Cameron didn’t have to call a referendum. But Mr. Renzi had no choice; in Italy, constitutional reforms must gain final approval from the people. This wasn’t an extraordinary event. In any other moment, it would have passed almost unremarked, as the demise of one more Italian government in a long string of them……

Is Mr. Renzi’s tearful demise another bump after Mr. Trump, then? Not really. Mr. Trump’s victory was unexpected; Mr. Renzi’s defeat was entirely predictable. And Italy is not showing signs of post-traumatic stress, like America. The next prime minister will not be Beppe Grillo, the maverick populist (and admirer of Mr. Trump), nor as colorful, nor as lively. After the tumultuous 1,000 days of Mr. Renzi — who proposed a lot, accomplished a little and left few stones unturned — Italy wants to be quiet for a while.

While European analyst Luca Scazzieri wrote in the Guardian:

Italy’s referendum does not mark a political earthquake. Its causes are different, and its effects on domestic and international politics are likely to be contained.

Italy’s no vote does not fit quite so neatly into the narrative of a populist revolt against globalisation and elites. Themes such as globalisation and immigration did not feature as strongly in the debate. Instead, after Renzi stated that he would resign if the constitutional reforms were rejected, the debate was focused on his own record as prime minister. And while of course populists voted no, many of the other no voters did so against the substance of the reforms, arguing that they were anti-democratic and would have altered constitutional checks and balances. Unlike Britain and the US, where elites were homogeneously in favour of remaining in the EU and opposed to Trump, in the Italian case, the political establishment and the experts were split in two……

Opposition to the proposed constitutional changes did not just come from the populist Five Star Movement and the nationalist Northern League, but also from mainstream political figures. These included factions of Renzi’s own Democratic party, former prime ministers such as Massimo D’Alema and Mario Monti, prominent academics and former constitutional court judges. This was not a vote that neatly pitted globalists against nativists or “the populists” against “the establishment”.

As for many things about Italy, and especially about its politics, applying a template which may work in the UK and the USA does not work. It is a more fractured society where there are currents and undercurrents, where things are not clear cut.

That is why those that see this referendum as another blow towards the demise of the EU, or like Trump an expression against the ‘elites’ are going to be disappointed.

Italy will somehow muddle along. Like it has always done.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

457 Visa review is not ‘Hansonism’ or ‘Protectionism. #auspol

In the post Trump word we seems to live in a topsy turvy world where a Prime Minister who owns a multi million Point Piper mansion in Sydney criticises ‘elites’ , and where analysing whether the current way of getting overseas workers through the 457 visa is ‘Trump-lite’ by someone who has exported Australian jobs to New Zealand.

Or even when a government accuses the opposition of populism in the week when they are considering shipping refugees in Malaysia, something they vehemently opposed a few years ago. 

Turnbull has accused Shorten of hypocrisy as the highest number of 457 visas were granted when he was the employment minister. although Labor retorted the numbers were high under Mr Shorten because he inherited a system with few restrictions as a consequence of policies of the former the Howard government.

But going beyond the inevitable partisan toing and froing, the question remains that there is some level of misgivings about this program.  While the media and politicians may have resurrected this issue after Trump, this issue has been bubbling along.  The Australian Union movement has raised it for some time.  ACTU Secretary Dave Oliver talked about this in 2013.

If we characterise this issue as a capital  – labour one, it is important to ensure that capital does not take hold of the arguments like Michael Stutchbury has done on Insiders this morning.

Joanna Howe, Senior Lecturer in Law, University of Adelaide wrote in The Conversation that there are a group of employers that are taking advantage of the situation, disadvantaging local workers and exploiting the foreign 457 visa workers.

But when we drill down into how the 457 visa works in practice, Labor does have a point when it claims that local workers are missing out on job opportunities. At present there is no proper mechanism for ensuring there is a skill shortage for the jobs in which employers are using 457 visas. This means employers can use 457 visas in areas where Australians are ready and able to be employed….

This means the 457 visa can be used by employers who wish to access foreign labour for an ulterior motive. While most decent employers will not do this, research shows there is a core group of employers that prefer temporary migrant workers because they are more compliant, work harder and are less likely to complain or be unionised.

Pro-business voices in the media such as Stutchbury, and basically everyone in News Ltd. will be ready to portray attempts to reform 457 visas as ‘protectionism’ ‘Trump-like’ and ‘xenophobic’.  It is a bit where the xenophobia in punishing refugees in Manus Island and Nauru is hidden behind ‘preventing the drownings’.

We should disregard Pauline Hanson saying that Labor is taking its cues from her party.  Hanson will maximise her media exposure, she’s very good at that.

The ALP has to frame the narrative not on ‘we don’t want foreigners taking Australian jobs’ , but in the sense that some businesses are rorting the system to put both Australian and foreign workers at a disadvantage to maximise profits.  This seems the approach of the ACTU and the ALP should follow this lead.

As Joanna Howe states:

……the conversation needs to be respectful and responsible – it should be about protecting Australian access to job opportunities and protecting foreign workers from rampant exploitation. This is a problem of the government’s own making and the fault lies squarely at its door for the shambolic way it manages temporary labour migration.

 

1 Comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Would an Australian electoral system got #Clinton elected? #RankedChoiceVoting #rankedvoting

There is no denying that there are many shocked people about Donald Trump being President of the United States.

One thing that is somehow comforting many Americans is that Hilary Clinton was actually voted by more people than Trump.   With a parliamentary system where members are elected to represent a particular area, having an accurate translation of this into seats does not always happens.  In Australia we also had issues in this.  In the 1998 election the ALP got 50.98% of the vote compared to the Coalition 49.2%, but ended up losing the election with the Coalition ending up with 54.05% of the seats compared with the ALP 45.27% .

In the USA this is further complicated by the electoral college system where “electors” are those who pledge beforehand to vote for the candidate of a particular party.

In the aftermath of the Trump victory, there have been recriminations that the other two candidates Jill Stein and Gary Johnson lost Clinton the election.

According to articles by CNN and Mic  if half (or more) of third-party voters in the key states of Florida, Michigan, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin had just picked Clinton instead of Johnson or Stein, she would have won.

So what if the USA had an Australian style preferential system, could have Clinton won those states?  Before looking at this it has to be noted that in Australia no candidate gets 100% of the preferences.  Antony Green shows in his website that in 2016 Green preferences flowed 81.94% to the ALP and 18.06% to the Coalition.

Florida

florida

So if we had a similar trend in the State of Florida and assume that 82% of preferences went to Clinton she would have received 52,495 extra votes.  Which would mean a total of 4,538,240 which would have not won over Trump.  The issue here is how many preferences would have gone from the much higher vote of Johnson.  The Libertarian Party is a mix bags of abolishing the welfare state completely but allowing abortion and decriminalising drug use, so who knows where conservatives would have placed a second preference.   Clinton would have needed more than 67,275 preferences from Johnson voters which 32.6% of those voters, and that’s not outside the realm of possibility.  But but with preferential voting Johnson’s voters would also give preferences to Trump.  So it would all depend on that.

Michigan

michigan

In Michigan if Clinton got 82% of the Stein preferences she would have got 41,562 extra votes giving her a total of 2,308,935. Include some preferences from Johnson votes I think  she would might have been home and hosed here.

Pennsylvania

pennsylvania

Using the same criteria Clinton would have received 40,108 extra votes bringing her to 2,884,816 which would not have helped her.  She would have needed more than 28,125 from Johnson voters which is not outside the realm of possibility, but again with preferential voting Johnson’s voters would also give preferences to Trump.  I can’t see that preferential voting would have got Clinton the state here.

Wisconsin

wisconsin

Here the 82% flow of Stein preferences to Clinton would have got her 25,404 extra votes, taking her to 1,407,616, just under Trump.  In this case the Johnson’s voters preferences would have decided who would win the state.

So could have Clinton won?

I am no psephologist. These are really back of an envelope calculations.  But I hope they can demonstrate that preferential voting can affect the outcome of an election.

Whatever the result, the benefit of preferential voting is that no vote is wasted.  Votes for Stein and Johnson were disregarded, while with preferential voting even those voters have an influence on the outcome.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized