posted Jan 8, 2008

I'm a Pom who was at the game and have just returned to Canberra from Sydney having witnessed an amazing sporting spectacle. I don't suppose many of you - even some journo's saw the match, but let me tell you I was more upset about what I witnessed last week than the debarcle I saw England endure in Perth last Ashes out! Sadly one decision - which was to be compounded by a series of others - on the first day of what was a compelling, exciting, skillful, controversial and enjoyable Test Match has ultimately left a bad taste in the mouth, cricket’s reputation tarnished and even the tours future in question.

Steve Bucknor’s regrettable (and tragically human) error has singly resulted in all that followed. India have lost a Test Match that Australia should have been lucky to draw, Harbajan has received a three match ban and the umpires legitimacy, who’s decision is ‘final’, has been called into question by the players. I believe, sadly, that the Australian team (and others before it) is largely responsible for all of the above.

Manchester United have largely maintained a hegemonic grip over the Premiership trophy since it’s inception, with a manager, squad (particularly with Roy Keane as captain) and 60,000 supporters that have combined to intimidate both opposition and officials alike. I do not deny United play attractive football, nor the Australian cricket team frankly incredible cricket, yet it is the adoption of aggressive and intimidatory tactics that lies behind much of the two teams successes. I hasten to point out that the Aussie supporters were, on the whole, despite the attention given to expulsions, a credit to the sport and their country.

I do not for one moment condone Harbajan’s actions, yet in the context of certain members of the Australian teams inability to take a light-hearted pat on the backside in the spirit it was intended, a complex and ‘free-spirited’ character like Harbajan foolishly couldn’t think before he opened his mouth. Ricky Ponting’s report or rather ‘dobbing-in’, like a late tackle from behind by Keane, it would appear stems not from any hurt feelings or a sense of moral outrage, but because he could not articulate a cricketing answer to the Indian’s challenge to his teams authority at that stage of the game. We’ve witnessed before the toys being thrown out of the pram, particularly during key moments in the Ashes of 2005, where his limited captaincy skills we’re exploited by Michael Vaughan. As Corporal Jones once said: “they don’t like it up ‘em”.

Australian soil now appears to have become the ‘fortress’ that Old Trafford has been for over a decade. Officials appear quick to afford the home side decisions, yet reluctant to award any against them (away penalties at Old Trafford being as frequent as Haley’s Comet). Australian teams have developed a modern version of the competitive and intimidatory cricket that WG Grace used to great effect over 150 years ago. Nothing is new, yet the ‘pressure-pot’ cricket developed by Australia, particularly in tandem with Warne’s bowling, has come to affect just as many umpires as it has batsmen. Who will forget Warne, Gilchrist et al ‘dooohing!’ and ‘aaawing!’ ad nauseum, as the ball - yet again - finds the middle of the bat, or for that matter McGrath’s 22-yard follow-through and snarl? Sledging? Tip of the psychological iceberg.

Worryingly, when the umpire does give a decision against Australia, they are not accepted with the good grace, the Australian players expect their opposition to display. Michael Clark’s refusal to walk having gloved a clear catch to slip first ball, may have looked like ‘disbelief’ as the commentators charitably called it, but for my mind it was Clark forcing the umpire (who must have been under incredible pressure, despite the ease of the decision) to give him out. No surprise then, that a very good shout for LBW with the hat-trick ball was declined. If some Indian batsmen were deemed to be showing dissent in their first innings, then this went way beyond that.

My mind re-calls the Perth Test last year and an England squad, having been stung into action, both in play and selection policy, following the disastrous capitulation in Adelaide. Andrew Strauss over the series suffered and accepted without any major histrionics a series of decisions that Ponting found hard to swallow last week, without being afforded the life Ponting so quickly forgot. Yet it was Rudy Koertsen’s inability to give relatively simple LBW appeals by Monty Panesar against Symmonds and Hayden that proved to turn the match. With both posting big scores and gaining confidence, while their opposition did not receive the rewards their toils and good bowling deserved. And so it was last week, and to the detriment of the series, cricket and certain Australian player’s reputations.

Poor decisions will always be a part of cricket at every level, yet how these come about and how they are received requires addressing. The point is that if England had won (or deservedly drawn) the Test in Perth, as India would have clearly done if Symmonds had been given out for 30 (what price those 132 extra runs in a 122 run victory?); each series would have still been alive. I don’t believe for one minute that this Indian team will (as certain members of the England squad appeared to) ‘throw the towel in’, but regardless of what happens in Perth during the next Test (like Melbourne last Boxing Day), we will not witness the game we should have if the series were still to play for. India has lost a test match and possibly some of their desire to compete, but it is cricket that is the real loser. The famous ‘level playing field’ that cricket has (Lords aside) metaphorically given to all sports has been somewhat doctored by the adoption of psychological cricket over of, or in tandem with the traditional cricketing skills of batting, bowling and fielding. Cricket supporters in Australia both inside and outside of the press box crave for a competitive series. It may never come if the current situation persists.

Australia is the best team in the world. As a cricket lover of the romantic variety, it is very sad however, that the Australian team appear to - in part - rely on the intimidation of opposition and officials to maintain this position. The best exponents of any sport should demonstrate the best skills or ability, and not the naked ‘at all costs’ attitude sadly inherent in the winners of the Sydney Test (which the buggers also seem to be best at). Give me an Arsenal (mercifully minus Martin Keown) or an India any day. And judging by the Aussie press and supporter polls it appears that they've had enough too.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 8, 2008

Whoever you support, however bad the decisions, and whatever the bad feeling between the sides, the moment the umpire or referee is seen as a figure whose stature and 'final say' authority can be eliminated by request to the ruling body, is the day cricket dies.
By all means, have a clear process for monitoring umpire performance, but not this 'pick your own umpire' nonsense. Neutral umpired was supposed to overcome this problem.
In my view,the game is being rushed to the grave as we speak, aided and abetted by the ICC.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 9, 2008

"7. And can please somebody reduce the over commercialization of the game? "

If any country is responsible for this it's India

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 9, 2008

I'm looking forward to Aust vs Aust A, then we might actually get a match worth watching.
And if one of the teams get upset, and wants to go home, well they're already there; no lengthy airport delays, and they can racially abuse each other to their heart's content without upsetting anyone. Plus the Aust media can tell us all how great we are and everyone, in Aust at least, will be happy.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 10, 2008

Time to draw a line and hope Madugalle can implore upon Australia to change their attitude,i'm not going to hold my breath,Ponting will be desperate to break the record so their shambolic and peurile behaviour wil continue.


Regards

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 18, 2008

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=368583

what is this I wonder ???????

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 18, 2008

It seems to me that ALL teams do almost anything to try to win the game on the field.
India are now .... trying anything they can off the field as well. !!!
Bullying the ICC. Allowing agressive racist behavior by supporters at home games.
Maybe it's time to remind the BCCI that threats can go both ways. The BCCI would be burnt (not as effigies) in the street if the ICC kicked them out.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 18, 2008

comment by pommyrob
posted 12 Minutes Ago

http://wwos.ninemsn.com.au/article.aspx?id=368583

what is this I wonder ???????
-------------------

No idea you cant really see but whatever it was it was done with a bit of JamesBond secret agent style....Probably just a tissue or something hopefully.

Guaranteed if it was Punter pocketing something the whole 606 board would be up in arms calling for his head.

add comment | complain about this comment

posted Jan 18, 2008

pommyrob,

That footage did seem a bit suspect indeed,

If it was in fact just a tissue or a hankie why all the secret society crap. H'mmm the mind wonders, inagine if it was Symonds it would be splashed all over the press in India??????

Then again it could of been just something as simple as a banana or zinc cream

add comment | complain about this comment