One-Eyed Richmond Forum
Football => Richmond Rant => Topic started by: one-eyed on February 26, 2009, 12:19:20 AM
-
Richmond wary of Ben Cousins documentary
Mark Robinson | February 26, 2009
RICHMOND remains undecided about the airing of Ben Cousins' documentary, as the spotlight on the confessed drug addict intensifies.
The film-makers are expected to be in or around the Tigers' rooms tonight when Cousins plays his first AFL match in more than 12 months.
It could be the final footage for the documentary.
Producer Paul Butler has almost finished the process of cutting hundreds of hours of material to an hour or 90- minute program.
What remains is a bidding war from the TV networks.
The fee for Cousins' documentary is estimated between $250,000 and $500,000.
Richmond president Gary March is yet to see excerpts of the documentary, but reiterated the club had the power to veto its airing.
"We said we'd have a look at it and then we'd make a decision," he said.
"I think it's nearing completion and I think tonight might play a part in the completion."
March, who wants an end to the "circus" surrounding Cousins, said the club's and Ben's interests have to be considered in regards to the doco.
"I said to the footy boys, I want them to have a look at it and consider the impact on Ben, the footy club and the playing group - and myself and Steven Wright (CEO) would look at it."
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25107423-2862,00.html
-
The fee for Cousins' documentary is estimated between $250,000 and $500,000.
As long as he puts the proceeds towards a charity I have no issue with the profits from his story at this point.
Otherwise..
-
Patrick Smith agrees with you Magic....
Cousins mustn't exploit fall
Patrick Smith | February 26, 2009 | The Australian
THE most famous Australian sportsman this morning will be Brendan Jones who has been drawn to play Tiger Woods in the first round of the World Match Play in Arizona. Woods has not played since the US Open last year, which he won on one leg, and the world's sporting eyes will fixate on his return. So by extension they will be on Jones. It is a tough gig.
Come tonight that will not be the case and it matters not whether Jones wins or loses to the world's greatest golfer. Tonight it will be Ben Cousins who will dominate the headlines and news bulletins.
Cousins returns to official football after a 12-month ban for bringing the game into disrepute because of his ongoing battle with drugs. He scraped back into football when Richmond proved to be the only club out of 16 that would risk the recovering drug addict. And that only seemed to happen after a kerfuffle at the club where the president Gary March didn't appear to know what his coach Terry Wallace had planned at the draft last year.
Cousins has been a great player. That is not to overblow his contribution to football. An All-Australian umpteen times, a Brownlow medallist, a premiership player, he will always be rated among the very best.
Richmond supporters have been energised. More than 9000 turned up to a family day on the weekend and March said more than 200 people followed Cousins to the toilets. It is believed no charges were laid. Wallace has asked for restraint from the media after Cousins was pictured moving into his new accommodation. Wallace must bite his tongue. This ferocious media focus is part of the Cousins contract. The Tigers can hardly be surprised.
While Cousins has brought new members with him, he has also brought tensions. The relationship between president and coach is so cool it is believed March has frostbite. There is no doubt Wallace, in part, saw Cousins as the best way to ensure he gets a contract extension this year. This is the last of Wallace's five-year term. He has won just 35 of 88 games and has failed to take the Tigers into the finals. Wallace is undoubtedly a superior coach but he had to rebuild the club when he took over in 2005. Ninth last year, the Tigers won more games than they lost. Cousins could take them to the finals.
While the Richmond fans appear ready to urinate in unison at the very sight of Cousins, not all the football community is bladder-over-heels in love with him. To many he remains The Smirk in jumper No32.
It is accepted that football will play a major role in his continuing battle against addiction. It is believed that is why Andrew Demetriou, the AFL's chief executive, was so keen that a club picked him up and the boss was more than happy to tell Richmond the club could do worse than select Cousins.
While Cousins was an embarrassment to West Coast when he could not hide his addiction, the AFL would be well pleased with itself if it could be seen as critical to the footballer's rehabilitation. It would help offset the rumours that dog its controversial illicit drug code.
Then there is the issue of a documentary that Cousins and his management team have made. It is reported that Team Cousins is offering the video to the highest bidder. If it is sold you must hope the proceeds go completely and directly to a drug rehabilitation charity. Any broadcaster that picks up the documentary must insist upon it. It would seem obscene if Cousins was to profit from his illness that has so destabilised football since he was first suspended by West Coast in season 2007.
While Cousins must first win his personal struggle with drug addiction, and he cannot be the AFL's poster boy on the perils of drug abuse until he does, he does have a responsibility to the sport he tarnished and the people he betrayed. And that would include not to be seen profiting from a drug habit that apparently nearly killed him. Drugs killed his best mate Chris Mainwaring.
The power of Cousins to deliver a profound message is obvious. The AFL hopes at least 50,000 supporters will attend tonight's NAB Cup match between the Tigers and Collingwood. Now the only people who take the NAB Cup seriously are the bank's sponsorship department, so to pull such a crowd underlines the interest in Cousins and his ability to overcome his illness.
But any message would be at best diluted, at worst washed away, if Cousins was to pocket one cent from his documentary. It could be seen as a signal that he is not the least bit contrite for the savaging he delivered to football and its fans. Being a champion footballer in Perth is to write your own cheque. Money is not an issue. If Team Cousins does not deliver the proceeds to charity then the football community should boycott the documentary and the network that broadcasts it.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25107261-12270,00.html
-
... Wallace has asked for restraint from the media after Cousins was pictured moving into his new accommodation. Wallace must bite his tongue. ...
lol. Now the papers are in the business of telling people what they can and cannot say. Perhaps they should send Terry a script with all the things they want to hear before the next press conference.
"Bugger the facts or your opinion Terry, this is what we want you to say. Makes good copy you know, and you know we'll just make it up anyway ... now where DID I put Damien Barrett's phone number."
-
Patrick Smith agrees with you Magic....
Frightening. ;D
Let's just hope benny does intent to put the proceeds towards the right cause.
Plenty in society affected with his ills don't get the support he's been given in recovery.
-
Untill we all see this documentary I dont think the Moral Police(patrick smith) has the right to tell Ben Cousins what to do with his money.
-
As Robert Walls pointed out, why make a fuss over the media following Cousins everywhere but allow a film crew into the change rooms prior to a game to make this documentary?
-
As Robert Walls pointed out, why make a fuss over the media following Cousins everywhere but allow a film crew into the change rooms prior to a game to make this documentary?
Because his own house is his own private area and they're following him and watching him at all hours, meanwhile he allows a film crew to film with his knowledge and is public domain like everyone else was watching him tonight in the rooms.
Awful comparison.
-
Cousins mustn't exploit fall
Patrick Smith | February 26, 2009 | The Australian
It would seem obscene if Cousins was to profit from his illness that has so destabilised football since he was first suspended by West Coast in season 2007.
Is it not obscene that media also seek to profit from the illness, including your own employer, and what do you think that if Channel 9 was to part with $500,000 for this, do you honestly think that they would donate the ad revenue from it to a drug rehab? :lol.
[/quote]
But any message would be at best diluted, at worst washed away, if Cousins was to pocket one cent from his documentary. It could be seen as a signal that he is not the least bit contrite for the savaging he delivered to football and its fans. Being a champion footballer in Perth is to write your own cheque. Money is not an issue. If Team Cousins does not deliver the proceeds to charity then the football community should boycott the documentary and the network that broadcasts it.
[/quote]
I'd really like to know what the "savaging" is that he delivered to football and it's fans.
Who does he need to show contrition to. You, Patrick? Should he personally get on his knees live on the Kevin Bartlett show and beg your forgiveness.
What an overpaid, hypocritical turd you are. Was hoping for some fresh analysis on the footy this year but it looks like the same old crap from the same old farts. :banghead
FWIW I couldn't care less if Cousins took the money, good on him, mass media is a tool for making money, nothing else, why not use it for yourself.
-
how do journos find anyone to stuff them ?
-
Tigers ban Cousins' film crew
Caroline Wilson | February 28, 2009
BEN Cousins' documentary team has been banned from Punt Road, with Richmond president Gary March admitting that allowing the Cousins film crew into Telstra Dome on Thursday night "probably wasn't the smartest decision".
However, March scoffed at Collingwood president Eddie McGuire's suggestion that the existence of the documentary had put the Magpies off Cousins, describing McGuire's comments as "inappropriate".
"If Eddie wants to keep justifying his decision not to take Ben because his supporters keep asking the question, that's fine with us," said March yesterday. "If it keeps Richmond in the papers we're happy. I do think it's inappropriate for presidents to keep talking about other clubs."
Cousins was hospitalised at 3am yesterday after returning home from the NAB Cup clash against Collingwood after his sister, a friend and the Tigers doctor Greg Hickey became concerned about the after-effects of concussion he sustained late in the third quarter.
The player and his much-anticipated debut with Richmond was the source of some tension in the rooms after the game when documentary producer Paul Butler and his team attempted to interview the heavily dazed footballer.
The Age understands that Richmond's general manager of football, Craig Cameron, ordered Butler to halt filming a conversation with Cousins and place his cameras on the ground after the media had been told that Cousins would miss a scheduled post-match interview on medical grounds.
Cameron is believed to have made it plain that any footage of a concussed Cousins interview would not be allowed to go to air should the documentary be sold.
When asked whether the Tigers would again allow the documentary team into the MCG for the round-one Richmond-Carlton clash next month, Cameron replied: "I think it's safe to say we won't be doing it again. It's done with now."
After the game, Cousins could not remember where he had parked his car and several times following the emphatic win by Collingwood asked club officials whether the Tigers had won and whether the game had been a pre-season match or home-and-away game. He also asked several times whether it had been his first game for Richmond.
After Cousins found his car and made his way home with Hickey and his small personal entourage, the group became concerned and Cousins was admitted to hospital for observation. A CT scan was taken but the 30-year-old was cleared of long-term damage.
Although he passed more tests at the club yesterday, Cousins — whose return to AFL football after being sacked by West Coast and suspended by the competition played a major part in the staggering Thursday-night crowd of more than 37,000 — is unlikely to play in Friday's NAB Challenge game in Shepparton.
March and Cameron spoke early yesterday and after the talks Cameron informed Cousins' manager, Ricky Nixon, that the documentary team had become something of a sideshow on Thursday night and would be barred from Richmond.
The Tigers have a contractual right to veto the documentary but remain cautiously keen for it to be aired sooner rather than later, if at all, and preferably before the start of the 2009 season.
Richmond had agreed to a request from Cousins to allow his group to record his first genuine AFL hit-out in 18 months, believing that lenience would put some closure on the documentary. The club had second thoughts before the game when it saw the production team in the rooms before the match.
http://www.realfooty.com.au/news/news/tigers-ban-cousins-film-crew/2009/02/27/1235237923597.html?page=fullpage#contentSwap1
-
Fair enough that the tigers have banned the doco team from Punt Rd .You cant have the tail wagging the dog.
-
"If Eddie wants to keep justifying his decision not to take Ben because his supporters keep asking the question, that's fine with us," said March yesterday. "If it keeps Richmond in the papers we're happy. I do think it's inappropriate for presidents to keep talking about other clubs."
Take the bastard on March ! :thumbsup
-
"If Eddie wants to keep justifying his decision not to take Ben because his supporters keep asking the question, that's fine with us," said March yesterday. "If it keeps Richmond in the papers we're happy. I do think it's inappropriate for presidents to keep talking about other clubs."
Take the bastard on March ! :thumbsup
I love the concept "cda, []())([]" but March could only make it worse by adding to this. He got it right and doesn't need to say any more.
-
As Robert Walls pointed out, why make a fuss over the media following Cousins everywhere but allow a film crew into the change rooms prior to a game to make this documentary?
Because his own house is his own private area and they're following him and watching him at all hours, meanwhile he allows a film crew to film with his knowledge and is public domain like everyone else was watching him tonight in the rooms.
Awful comparison.
Agree, theres a big difference between hiding behind bushes in a front yard, or menus in a restaurant to get garbage tabloid news and a film crew who are invited in.
Walls is an opinionated boofhead, I would love the tables to be turned on these self righteous fools who have over inflated opinions of themselves! Let the hounds loose on their arses for a week or two, see how they go >:( >:( >:(
-
Good call.
I was okay because it was a NAB cup match that they were there but it's the right call to deny the access in round 1.
-
Just thinking about this Cuz doco a bit more, Plough probably has a better understanding of the effect of having cameras in the rooms on a team as he's been through this before with "Year of the Dog". It was a great doco to watch but it'd be interesting to know what all the doggie players at the time thought of having everything they did behind closed doors exposed to the public arena. From an outsider point of view it seemed to jell them as a unit for the next couple of years although they failed come finals.
Cuz has already done the I'll spew moment for his doco lol :-X.