The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

Posted: 12 Jul 2011 05:33 PM PDT

JULY 13 — As Malaysia takes in the aftermath of Bersih 2.0, a few things have been laid quite bare by events in our capital over the weekend.

One — that tens of thousands of Malaysians can accomplish what most of us already know we're capable of doing: unite for a common cause. And no, not necessarily a drummed-up one handed down from up top, but a grassroots one based on the universal values of justice and fair play that transcends religious, racial and even political interests.

The fact is, many of us already do this with our multiracial friends, co-workers and neighbours, so only the truly integration-challenged folks out there would raise an eyebrow at this.

Two — that if nothing else, Saturday was a reminder to both the Najib administration as well as Pakatan Rakyat that the people of Malaysia are in fact, the boss.

All of us – not just the majority but the minorities as well. Any politician or political faction that forgets, chooses to ignore, or worse, asks that the people be "grateful" would do so at their peril.

You can't want to cultivate a knowledge-based society and not deal with what naturally comes with it – a thinking populace with strong opinions to put forth.

Three — that no amount of propaganda or choreographed mainstream media campaign by the government can gloss over; much less overturn the honest, heartfelt and emotionally resonant personal accounts that have been shared, re-shared and made viral for and by the more than 17 million Malaysians who now regularly access the Internet.

The poignant words and images of #bersihstories have collectively bore witness, recording a moment in our history that would echo on. Indeed, the mindshare slam dunk also exposes just how out-of-touch existing government machinery is in dealing with information age realities. Some GTP NKRAs may be in need of a relook.

Four — that no one is really swayed anymore by the tired, disingenuous argument that street rallies and demonstrations "tarnish" the country's image... whatever that is supposed to mean. On a personal level, how many of us really occupy our time thinking about and judging other people? Aren't we busy enough with our own matters? Did the French racial riots tarnish their country's image? Did Tahrir square condemn Egypt in the eyes of the world? And no, for the pedants out there I am not necessarily equating the two with Bersih 2.0.

Besides, image should arise from substance, not artificially shaped by what façade we would like to portray to outsiders. For lessons on that, we can always look to the likes of North Korea.

Five — that at the end of the day, those who shout the loudest are often the ones without the stuff to back it up. Of all the factions that were supposed to "show" on the day, only one really mattered in the end.

And more importantly, it was plain for observers to see that it was the one non-partisan cause that represented the concerns of ordinary Malaysians who just wanted to exercise their constitutional right to peaceful assembly.

Six — and certainly most damning of all is that whether by miscalculation or incompetence, the police's actions and especially the FRU's excessive show of force on the day had more or less ensured that the government of the day loses yet more hearts and minds, particularly that of our youth — including and especially those who only experienced their political awakening on July 9th.

That's the sort of loss of goodwill you don't easily recover from.

So what now for Malaysia after Bersih 2.0?

Whether for it, against it, or undecided about it, 9/7 has happened. I would like to think that aside from one truly tragic incident on the day, the worst case scenario did not come to pass.

Provided a semblance of Bersih 2.0's eight demands are achieved in time for the next general elections; I can only hope that as a taxpaying, family-raising registered voter, that we will as a nation galvanise our better aspects and come to a point where we adopt a more mature, issues-based political scene that relies less on grandstanding and more on pointed debate; less on cults of personalities and more on selfless representation; and less on sectarian causes and more on national interest.

It's time to move on with our national discourse.

Just look at our neighbours and the way they are going. We owe it to ourselves to be represented by intelligent, thinking politicians to properly represent an increasingly well-informed and knowledgeable Malaysian society.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price.

Football contracts: Normal rules do not apply

Posted: 12 Jul 2011 05:23 PM PDT

JULY 13 — Luka Modric is anxious to leave Spurs and hop across London to sign for Chelsea; Cesc Fabregas can't wait to return to his native Catalonia and rejoin Barcelona; Carlos Tevez is desperately missing his family and insists that he simply must leave rainy old Manchester for sunnier climes.

It's nothing new. Footballers wanting to leave their clubs and feeling a sense of injustice when they're not easily allowed to do so happens all the time; only the names of the players and the clubs change from one transfer window to the next.

Broadly speaking, it's all a bit of a game and players generally get their way. Hence Cristiano Ronaldo's repeated wishes to leave Manchester United and join Real Madrid were eventually granted, to pick just one example.

At first the clubs make loud public protestations, firmly stating that the player is under contract and will not be allowed to leave at any price. Behind the scenes, though, it's a different matter as they make strenuous efforts to procure the highest possible fee for a player they know they can't keep.

Legally, players have justification for believing that the process of moving from one employer to another should be more straightforward. In practically any other industry, after all, people change jobs all the time and, beyond insisting upon a three-month notice period or something similar, there's nothing the jilted employer can do to prevent the unwanted departure. Some senior executives might have contractual clauses prohibiting them from moving to direct rivals, but even they are usually overcome without too many problems – restraint of trade laws ensure that.

Footballers find it a lot more difficult than most people to further their careers by making moves that would allow them to earn them more money and provide new personal opportunities. Modric, for example, wants to leave Spurs to join Chelsea: what's wrong with that? Unlike his current club, Chelsea are in the Champions' League, can be regarded as realistic Premier League title challengers and are prepared to significantly increase his wages. Of course he'll want to join them; why should Spurs be allowed to stop him? They couldn't do so in any other industry.

But that's the point: top-class professional sport is not like any other industry. Its protagonists are rewarded with financial sums far, far in excess of anything that most people could even dream of, with even many ordinary Premier League players becoming millionaires many times over – never mind the genuine superstars, whose annual earnings are akin to those commanded by only the very biggest business leaders.

More precisely, a large element of football's enormous global popularity is derived from the powerful, uniting team ethic that relies upon players and managers staying with the same club for a prolonged period of time.

Most sports fans are not just casual consumers of their favourite team in the same way that they are of other products – they are passionate, fervent fans in the true, fanatical, sense of the word, developing from childhood a deep and lifelong personal affinity with specific teams and players.

Arsenal fans will always love Tony Adams, Ian Wright and Denis Bergkamp not just because they were great players, but because they stayed with their club for many years and ultimately came not too far short of being regarded as friends of their fans. Steven Gerrard and Kenny Dalglish fulfil the same function for Liverpool; Roy Keane and Mark Hughes for Manchester United; Didier Drogba and Gianfranco Zola for Chelsea, and so on. Fans don't personally know these players, but they almost feel like they do.

As an industry, football relies on that kind of team togetherness, continuity and belonging; it allows followers of the sport to develop the sense of identity that binds them so closely to their chosen team year after year. Without it, their passion and excitement would be significantly diminished. Although fans will always expect and accept a certain amount of player movement from one club to another, they also expect a certain amount of loyalty and continuity to provide the identity they (often subconsciously) crave.

If Adams, Zola, Keane and co had flitted around from club to club whenever it suited them rather than committing themselves to one employer for the majority of their careers, they would receive far less personal adulation from fans. And the bond between fans and the clubs would also be commensurately weakened.

It might happen. Just recently, English cricket hero Andrew Flintoff decided to end his international career due to injury and become the world's first "freelance cricketer", joining a myriad of clubs on a game-by-game basis depending on their short-term needs and his fitness.

It's a fairly straightforward concept, common in many other industries, and there's no reason why the same thing couldn't happen with a footballer (and David Beckham would be the obvious candidate, hot-footing it between LA, London and Milan from one week to the next). But if it were to be conducted on a mass scale, surely fans wouldn't buy it. How can you commit yourself to supporting a team if you don't know who will be playing from week to week?

The long-term result would surely be that fans would gradually feel detached from the players and the clubs, care less about the game and spend less on club merchandise and television subscriptions; clubs would earn less money and players, as a direct consequence, would suffer a significant reduction in wages.

Football is not like any other industry, and its terms of employment cannot be judged according to the same principles that apply elsewhere. Modric, Fabregas and Tevez should not, therefore, expect to receive or be allowed to receive the same treatment as employees in other industries; but I don't think they'll start seeing it quite that way anytime soon.

* The views expressed here are the personal opinion of the columnist.

Full Feed Generated by Get Full RSS, sponsored by USA Best Price.

Kredit: http://www.themalaysianinsider.com

Rabu, 13 Julai 2011

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

The Malaysian Insider :: Opinion

0 ulasan:

Catat Ulasan