I could have worn the coverage of some important rugby match on 7.30, your national evening current affairs programme. I would have just tuned out, in fact I did, and I do recognise this is a national programme and it is of interest to people in more than one state.
What I am annoyed about is extensive coverage on Victoria's state tv news. I don't where the Wallabies are based, I don't know what sort of rugby they play, league or union, I don't know any of the players or any of the other people involved in the sport. I watched the story with glazed eyes and I was none the wiser after. Is this a national team? You didn't say. Is it league or union? You didn't say. Most Victorians would be the same and it is of no interest at all to me, and I expect most Victorians. There is an increasing tendency to force rugby on Victorians and I don't like it.
If you were a commercial tv station, I would suggest rugby is paying you to provide coverage, but that would not happen at my ABC. So why force such irrelevances upon us? Surely there must have some bad boi behaviour by an Aussie Rules player to report?
Just to note while I am bashing my ABC that I love dearly, I stopped listening to Richard Stubbs because there was just too much music and the discussion of such, I did not mind him as a broadcaster and some of his work on war matters was brilliant and I do respect him as a good broadcaster and it is sad to see him retire from his afternoon radio position. Good luck to you Richard.
Andrew. (who thinks my 12 cents a day? is generally well spent)
Later edit: But wait, another ten minutes on tonight's 7.30. I have kind of connected things now, in so far as it is Twickenham in England and maybe an Australian team is playing a New Zealand team in a final. The sport looks very rough, with players charging into each other, so maybe that is rugby union?