How the left made sport the new battlefield in the culture wars Richard Allsop nybody who thought the election of the Rudd government meant the end of the culture wars was A not looking closely enough at the summer’s cricket. While many in the community had strong views about the rights and wrongs of the behaviour of both the Australian and Indian teams, few would have thought to place it all within the context of the culture wars. The left, of course, found a way. In a recent item in The Monthly, Gideon Haigh claimed saying goes, everything is political, then surely cricket is too? that: The left have dragged the sporting field into their simple cul- ture wars paradigm, and they are unwilling to let it go. The Australian reopened the culture war on a new Haigh believes, quite logically, that poor behaviour in front, passing off hectares of partisan comment in park cricket is triggered by poor behaviour at international support of its star columnist Ponting as news. level. Your typical Monthly reader knows instinctively that Haigh is an outstanding cricket historian, who has produced if there is poor behaviour in the Australian community, it many of the best modern works on the game. He is also an has only arisen in the Howard years, and if that behaviour enthusiastic club cricketer and, in his Monthly piece, he went is endorsed by any columnist in The Australian (other than on to document some recent appalling behaviour that he, and Phillip Adams), it is somehow part of the culture wars. his club teammates, had been subjected to at the hands of But does condoning boorish behaviour on the cricket yobbish opponents. But Haigh illustrates an increasing trend field really place you on a particular side in the culture wars? in sporting commentary—writers desperate to politicise be- If it does, it is certainly not on the side which Haigh implies. haviour on and off the sporting field. If, as the old feminist After all, over the past half century, the strongest critics of boorish behaviour from Australia’s cricket team have not Richard Allsop is a Research Fellow been those on the left of the political divide, but those of a with the Institute of Public Affairs. more conservative bent. www.ipa.org.au IPA Review | May 2008 19 While Howard-haters would consider liking John Howard to be an offence, it seemed that even being liked by Howard was enough to earn the ire of the cultural warriors. It was, after all, under the cap- Howard and Latham were the subject teams of the 1950s than the Tasmanian taincy of Ian Chappell and during the of what was undoubtedly the most asi- born and raised Flanagan could man- Prime Ministership of Gough Whitlam nine Howard-hating piece of writing in age. that the Australian team first earned a the history of Howard-hating. Written Flanagan concluded his piece with reputation for uncompromising on- by regular Age columnist Martin Flana- the following: field behaviour and sledging. Back in gan, it appeared on the day of the 2004 I reckon if you got close to the 1970s the cultural fault lines seemed federal election. Howard’s imminent Latham, you would find he much clearer. re-election had clearly riled Flanagan would have something to say Young people had long hair, vocif- to such an extent that a desperate rear- about sport that was both erously supported Lillee and Thommo guard action was required on the back revealing of himself and the from The Hill, went to Sunbury and of the sports section. game he was describing. That’s voted for Gough. Their parents had Flanagan asserted that he had ‘nev- a difference between the two shorter hair, sat at the Paddington End er been persuaded that Howard has the men. How significant a differ- applauding good play from either side, serious interest in cricket that his image ence depends on your view of drew the line at any music heavier than people claim.’ He challenged his readers sport and its place in Austra- The Seekers and voted for Malcolm to find anything Howard had ‘ever said lian culture and politics. Fraser. that shows insight into the game’. Mark Latham, as a true child of In Flanagan’s mind, despite the fact If one had attempted to have a chat the 1970s, maintained the stereotype that Howard had been attending cricket about sport with Latham, staggering into the twenty-first century. In his in- since he was a boy (and, one can now back to Central after his day at the famous diary he described a day at the point out, was back at the SCG this Jan- cricket, the conversation might have cricket when he was a Shadow Minister uary), Flanagan’s politics preclude him been ‘revealing of himself’, but perhaps in January, 2003: from being able to acknowledge that not quite in the way Flanagan had in mind. I organised this as a ‘Back to the Howard may genuinely like the game. While Howard-haters would con- Hill’ day … reliving our glory Flanagan then turned to football sider supporting John Howard to be of- days from the early 1980s, on and this time Howard is condemned for fensive, it seemed that even being liked the piss, on the Hill … match- trying to make football small talk with by Howard was enough to earn the ire ing wits with the Barmy Army a Melbournian he met on the campaign of the cultural warriors. Such was the and ending the day legless. It trail. Howard asked the bloke which fate of Australia’s greatest sporting icon, must have taken me an hour team he followed and, when the response Don Bradman. to walk back to Central Sta- was that he did not follow a team, ‘the Any hopes that Howard’s demise tion—two steps forward, one Prime Minister instantly turned on his might have stopped the trashing of the step back. heels and was gone’. Flanagan opined that ‘I do not believe he really wanted Don’s achievements and character were Latham lamented that his only mistake to talk footy. I do not reckon he would dashed when ex-Latham staffer and cur- on the day had been to invite along know how’. rent progressive think tank Per Capita journalist Matt Price who ‘didn’t fit in, Of course, Howard did not really head, Michael Cooney, opened up in wouldn’t have a go and ended up scur- want to talk footy, but was politely The Sunday Age. rying off to the Churchill Stand’. Of trying to make conversation, some- Cooney suggested that believing course, the late Matt Price was not just thing that everyone, especially politi- the ‘most boring old men’s cricket myth a political journalist, but also a weekly cians of all hews, sometimes need to of them all’ about the quality of Brad- columnist for The Australian on sport- do. John Howard would probably not man’s 1948 Invincibles would have ing matters. His crime, in Latham’s do a great job of talking Australian become a condition of citizenship if eyes, was that he enjoyed his sport so- football, but he has never claimed it Howard had been re-elected. Cooney ber, rather than drunk. Perhaps Price was his sport. slammed Bradman as ‘a conservative, was closer to John Howard, who one However, there is a fair chance he pedantic captain and … administrator’ can see more easily in the other half of could have a better discussion with a and condemned him as ‘aloof in style the 1970s stereotype. Rugby League fan about the St George and a divider in nature’. The different sporting attitudes of 20 IPA Review | May 2008 www.ipa.org.au Kevin Rudd announces that unlike John Howard he won’t use sport for political purposes Kevin Rudd with the chief executives of Australia’s major sporting codes at the binge drinking summit in March 2008 AAP Image/Julian Smith. Bingeing secretary Bill Kelty and former Keating in dealing with a social problem which Cricket is not the only sport to have staffer, Sam Mostyn, that prompted the affects so many young Australians and been dragged kicking and screaming tough on drugs strategy. their families today’. into the culture wars during 2008. The fact that the AFL was full of While supporters of personal choice Ironically, it was that same journal of Labor sympathisers may have added might regard such a policy as a silly piece cultural warriordom, The Australian, enjoyment to the attacks on its drugs of nanny statism, for the hard left, it con- that ran a story about the culture wars policy, but there is no doubt that the firms their worst fears that Rudd is on affecting the AFL. Although strangely, government’s motivation was exactly the wrong side of the culture wars they this time The Australian was empathis- the same as had been in every other are desperate to continue fighting. The ing with those who had fallen victim to aspect of its tough on drugs strategy— columnist Guy Rundle recently com- the Howard government’s cultural cru- focus groups constantly showed that the plained in The Age that Rudd in power sade, rather than continuing to fight the punters like governments to be tough will be just like the last decade in Britain culture wars in Howard’s absence. on drugs. One only had to spend a few where ‘New Labour’s trick has been to The paper excitedly reported that minutes listening to talkback radio, or substitute behavioural coercion for real ‘a senior AFL figure has publicly con- to conversations on the train, to know structural change, so … war is declared firmed for the first time what many in that the AFL was on a loser.