Symonds stood down from national selection until April

[royboy2]

According to CA website today


Symonds stood down from national selection

03 February, 2009

Cricket Australia (CA) has advised its National Selection Panel (NSP) that Andrew Symonds cannot be considered for national selection until he has completed further counselling and rehabilitation.
CA Chief Executive Officer James Sutherland today announced that Symonds will be unavailable for consideration for selection for the South Africa Test tour this month and will need to satisfy formal rehabilitation criteria before again being made available for international selection.
Mr Sutherland said CA had re-assessed Symonds’ progress with his rehabilitation after the player was fined $4000 for a Code of Behaviour breach relating to detrimental public comment late last month.
“Our assessment is that he is making good progress but that his commitment needs testing against new, tougher criteria we will finalise after consultation with his counselors, the ACA and Queensland Cricket,” he said.
“We have a responsibility to Andrew and his welfare but we also have a responsibility to Australian cricket to ensure his commitment is as it needs to be before he can be considered for national selection”.
In making the decision, Mr Sutherland noted:
• Feedback from the state, national players and Australian team management supporting that Symonds was making good progress with the rehabilitation program he is undertaking
• The fact that there were mitigating circumstances in the detrimental public comment case heard last week
Mr Sutherland said he had advised Andrew Symonds of the decision.
Rehabilitation criteria are likely to include that:
• Symonds review and re-affirm his personal documented commitments
• The counselling program is increased in concentration and treated as a priority above Symonds CA and QC commitments
• Formal fortnightly rehabilitation progress reports are made to CA

He said CA would review Symonds’ progress at the end of the Sheffield Shield season, which is prior to the NSP selection of its squad for the Australia-Pakistan ODI series to be played from April.

[pluga_4]

so in a nut shell he ain't being picked for the south africa tour.

well that's a no brainer as if form doesn't warrant it (especially in regards to test selection).

you'd have to say his days as a test player are numbered.

[tribey]

Why are CA going to the trouble of blaming his off-field issues for it?

He's 34 and on form you wouldn't pick him for XXXX Beach Cricket.

[fryingpan]

Good news.

Would have prefered if his contract was ripped up there and then though.

[bombersno1]

Good we might get a better no6 in the test side now that actually bowls.

[Spook]

Guys on a serious note does anyone here know LtD (LionsThenDaylight) personally?

I say this as I think he would be in need of some counselling himself now. LtD may not be able to handle this recent set back and could even be consider a suicide risk.

LtD, please let us know that you are OK mate.

[bombersno1]

Where is Gunner as well suggesting Symonds is a walk up starter!

[Blue Dimension]

Guys on a serious note does anyone here know LionsThen Daylight personaly?
I say this as I think he would be in need of some councelling himslef now. LtD may not be able to handle this recent set back and could even be consider a suicide risk.
LtD, please let us know that you are OK mate.

rofl.

I think Gunnar would be pretty down too at the moment :p Apparently the radio interview was only 'a storm in a teacup'..

[bombersno1]

Apparently the radio interview was only 'a storm in a teacup'..

Classic Gunner:D

[weevil]

Hardly surprising, on balance it looks like a pretty good call.

Why are CA going to the trouble of blaming his off-field issues for it?

He's 34 and on form you wouldn't pick him for XXXX Beach Cricket.

It’s sending a message to him that he still has work to do.

[Blue Dimension]

I blame this a fair bit on CA still. He should have never been recalled in the first place. He was batting dismally, and his callup without any form under his belt pretty much indicated that he didn't have to put in the hard yards to get a game at International level. He should have been made to earn his place back.

[Jimthegreat]

According to CA website today

Fair enough, means I need another no.6 in my team. Hopefully he comes back better in every way.

ps: I'd get rid of the signature. People have had litigation taken against them many times from forum boards such as these. Not right either.

[aussie1st]

The right call no way he looked in the right state to tour SA.

[lincsPJ]

The right call no way he looked in the right state to tour SA.

im assuming you mean south australia?

he shouldnt even be gettin games for qld.

[Alpha1]

Guys on a serious note does anyone here know LtD (LionsThenDaylight) personally?

I say this as I think he would be in need of some counselling himself now. LtD may not be able to handle this recent set back and could even be consider a suicide risk.

LtD, please let us know that you are OK mate.


Poor little LTD, I am sure there are a lot of people on here who will feel sorry for him. :rolleyes:

[Admiral Afterworld]

Symonds is a proud Queenslander.

[damochandler]

i dont think he would have been picked any way. i reckon he dhould have been picked for the one day team. but any way i doubt we will see him play for australia ever again

[DIG]

Symonds is a proud Queenslander.
lol - i was waiting for that.

[DIG]

Just taking a step back for a minute. He couldn't have picked a worse ****ing time to go off the rails for us.

I've been a massive fan of Symonds and a vocal supporter of him for years on this forum (ironically once going through a 15 page debate with Longshanks over why he SHOULD be in the test a team a couple of years back!) but since his fishing trip last year he's done nothing but disappoint me.

Hope he can (somehow) come back and give us some more decent service in the ODI arena at least.

[black_spankie]

let's hope the only time we ever hear about him again is on the 'fishing board' tosser of the highest order.:thumbsu:
to royboy2, classic signature. the truth you speak.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I think Gunnar would be pretty down too at the moment :p Apparently the radio interview was only 'a storm in a teacup'..Why would I be "down"?

Symonds is a bit of a dropkick, and it sounds like he's exhausted the patience of his paymasters. So be it.

Not unreasonably, they probably expected Symonds to keep his nose clean while recovering from injury.

But that radio interview was still pretty tame. Certainly not a hanging offence. I don't back away from the way I've characterised it previously.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Where is Gunner as well suggesting Symonds is a walk up starter!If Symonds was fully fit and focused, he would be best XI.

This situation is akin to a player having an ongoing injury that prevents him from touring. If the judgement has been made that Symonds isn't physically and/or mentally up to playing Test cricket, then he shouldn't tour. The same way that if Phil Jaques' back or Stuart Clark's elbow aren't 100%, they shouldn't tour either.

But those circumstances don't necessarily show that those players aren't best XI when up and running.

You're trying to prove too much.

[Spook]

Where is Gunner as well suggesting Symonds is a walk up starter!

If Symonds was fully fit and focused, he would be best XI.

This situation is akin to a player having an ongoing injury that prevents him from touring. If the judgement has been made that Symonds isn't physically and/or mentally up to playing Test cricket, then he shouldn't tour. The same way that if Phil Jaques' back or Stuart Clark's elbow aren't 100%, they shouldn't tour either.

But those circumstances don't necessarily show that those players aren't best XI when up and running.

You're trying to prove too much.

lol... ROTFLMAO..

under lined... That is what many of us have been saying mate FFS. You and your old mate LtD have been arguing black and blue against us all. How obvious has it been that he was not mentally or Physically up to it... Very obvious to us but apparently not to you ... until now maybe?

[Gridlock'd]

You beauty.

[Blue Dimension]

Why would I be "down"?

Symonds is a bit of a dropkick, and it sounds like he's exhausted the patience of his paymasters. So be it.

Not unreasonably, they probably expected Symonds to keep his nose clean while recovering from injury.

But that radio interview was still pretty tame. Certainly not a hanging offence. I don't back away from the way I've characterised it previously.

You're a big fan of Symmo Gunnar, as we all know and supported him right the way through. You were still expecting him to tour, so I'd imagine there'd be a fair bit of disappointment there.

But it wasn't about the radio interview in itself as was discussed before in several threads, it was the state he was in while he conducted that interview, and the timing of it - the day before his Gold Coast club match.

If it was just a "storm in a teacup" as you said, then i doubt these extremes would have been taken.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

lYou and your old mate LtD have been arguing black and blue against us all. How obvious has it been that he was not mentally or Physically up to it... Very obvious to us but apparently not to you ... until now maybe?What is the sum total of Symonds' indiscretions in the past 6 months?

He skipped a team meeting and then said a naughty word on the radio.

On the surface, which is all I'm privvy to, that is not open-and-shut evidence that he's totally unable to play Test cricket.

My argument throughout has been that Symonds' form at Test level over the past two years has been good enough to warrant ongoing selection. On that score, he's still best XI. I stand by that. If it was only about performances at Test level, Symonds would be in the side.

[Admiral Afterworld]

What is the sum total of Symonds' indiscretions in the past 6 months?

He skipped a team meeting

To go fishing and drinking...

and then said a naughty word on the radio.

While drunk with a match to play the next day...

And let's not forget his general acting like an idiot while on tour (the bus incident, the "test players only" at the bar incident, getting in a fight).

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You're a big fan of Symmo Gunnar, as we all know and supported him right the way through. You were still expecting him to tour, so I'd imagine there'd be a fair bit of disappointment there.You're mischaracterising me here.

I wouldn't say I'm a "big fan" of Symonds at all. I think he's a bit of a meathead.

Beyond my belief that Australia is a better side with Symonds up and running, I'm not happy or disappointed either way about him not going to South Africa.

I backed his return to Test cricket because his performances at that level warranted it. That is the only reason.

But it wasn't about the radio interview in itself as was discussed before in several threads, it was the state he was in while he conducted that interview, and the timing of it - the day before his Gold Coast club match.

If it was just a "storm in a teacup" as you said, then i doubt these extremes would have been taken.It was still a storm in a teacup.

But it was also the straw that broke the camel's back.

I think the ACB had a reasonable expectation that Symonds, while recovering from injury and not on active duty for Australia, should be able to keep his head down and his nose clean. After everything that's happened, he should have been able to keep his name out of the papers for a month or so.

Instead, there was another indiscretion – albeit a minor one – and that led Symonds' paymasters to question whether their player was actually capable of pulling his head in. How many times does Symonds need it explained to him?

Under the circumstances, I don't blame the selectors for running out of patience after his little stunt on radio.

But in isolation, it was still piffling.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

To go fishing and drinking...So what?

Aussies like to pretend they're all laidback and anything-goes, but when it comes to professional sportsmen, they turn into Fred Nile.

Those episodes, on the surface, are no big deal.

I reckon the ensuing discussions, which none of us were privvy to, are what damned Symonds.

[JohnG]

Good move hopefully he gets the hint and pulls his head in or retires, the latter the better option i feel.

[Pakeha]

Another talent wasted., unfortunately. Every side seems to have one at some time.

Most corporate companies these days have a three strikes/out policy for employees. I think the ACB may think hes had enough leeway.

Also, I get the feeling there may have been more happenings than what we have heard about. Remember we only hear what the press get to hear, and that can either be exaggerated or diluted depending upon the player. The ACB, AFL, NRL etc don't like stories getting out, so maybe they had more to consider than what we're aware of.

I reckon the ACB must have a pretty thick file on him to take these steps, as the old saying once was, it's harder to get out of the squad than into it.

Plus (and trying to be very careful with my words here) with the sort of abuse he may get in SA from the Jaapie crowds, coupled with his current mindset, it might just be prudent to give him that extra time to do a bit more counceling rather than take the risk of a full on brainfade.

I don't like to see champions fall, and he probably could have been one, but I'll go with the jurisdiction on this discussion.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It will be interesting to see whether his replacement grabs his opportunity.

If McDonald bats at number six, he's going to need to score runs.

If he doesn't, are we going to stick with him for the Ashes?

Or will Symonds have had enough time on the naughty stool by then?

[didak04]

One way or the other Symonds was going to be left out of the side.

If it wasn't for behavioral reasons it would have been for his dreadful form all summer. There is only so far his past record in Tests could carry him.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

One way or the other Symonds was going to be left out of the side.

If it wasn't for behavioral reasons it would have been for his dreadful form all summer. There is only so far his past record in Tests could carry him.Is Hussey subject to the same logic?

Because Symonds probably has Hussey covered over the past two years, and Hussey was way shitter over the summer.

[Pakeha]

Is Hussey subject to the same logic?

Because Symonds probably has Hussey covered over the past two years, and Hussey was way shitter over the summer.

Well, Hussey has 4 more ODIs to redeem himself, if he can do it. Roy has squandered his chances completely.

It's gonna be hard in SA, but it may just be the tough tour that is needed to establish a new order for the future.

[didak04]

Is Hussey subject to the same logic?

Because Symonds has Hussey covered over the past two years, and Hussey was way shitter over the summer.

Well it's questionable whether Symonds has Hussey covered over the last 2 years and it is a bit of a stretch to say that Hussey was "way shitter over summer" both were very ordinary, but those are totally separate arguments.

Discussing Hussey's form is simply deflecting from the topic at hand. Can you honestly tell me that Symonds current form warrants selection?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

It's gonna be hard in SA, but it may just be the tough tour that is needed to establish a new order for the future.Don't you think this is over-stating it?

Katich, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke and Haddin are still going to be there.

It's not like we're going to be re-making the side through a baptism of fire.

And what if McDonald comes in and averages 20-something with the bat? Are we going to take him to England?

[Golden Duck]

This is probably the end of Symonds international playing career. Doubt we'll ever see him wearing the baggy green again, the selectors have already stated that their looking at the new up and comming crop to lead Australia's charge for the next World Cup. He's been a great servant of Australian cricket for many years, dazzling us with bat, ball, or pulling off blinders when fielding. Twice part of Australia's world cup winning squads he'll go down as one of the greatest one day players Australia's ever produced. A true character as well, so all the best Symmo.

[Blue Dimension]

So what?

There is an amount of professionalism that is required from a sportsperson, and he, over the last 6 months, has not even been close.

He should have been at that team meeting, and wasn't, and as such was banished from the team for the India tour.

Clearly his call up while his form was in the gutter, did not encourage better habits to help aid in his preparation for international representation.

Like i said, if it was just a 'storm in a teacup' then he wouldn't have been in this predicament. He's stepped out of line again and as such has been shunted from another tour and rightfully so. He shouldn't be back until he (or if he ever) puts the runs on the board and presents and prepares himself in better fashion. I'm sure the selectors and the ACB won't make the same mistake with him this time around.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Well it's questionable whether Symonds has Hussey covered over the last 2 years and it is a bit of a stretch to say that Hussey was "way shitter over summer" both were very ordinary, but those are totally separate arguments.Well, Symonds' average over the past two years is 55. Hussey's is 45.

And against South Africa, Hussey didn't get to double figures while the series was still alive.

He made a total of 10 runs in the first two Tests. That is exceptionally shit.

Symonds averaged 30 for the series.

I'd say Hussey was significantly shitter against South Africa. We can argue about the adverbs, but I think you understand my point.

Discussing Hussey's form is simply deflecting from the topic at hand.No - it isn't.

I'm establishing whether the rules you apply to Symonds also apply to other players.

Does one bad series mean Symonds' past results at Test level now count for nought?

Can you honestly tell me that Symonds current form warrants selection?Define current.

Last series?

Probably not, but it's not like we have an outstanding replacement. In light of that, you'd probably stick with the guy who had done the job over the past two years.

Does Hussey's current form warrant selection?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

There is an amount of professionalism that is required from a sportsperson, and he, over the last 6 months, has not even been close.How do you know?

Do you watch Symonds train?

Do you know how he conducts himself in the dressing room?

You're making a sweeping statement based on two piffling episodes that became public.

[Pakeha]

Don't you think this is over-stating it?

Katich, Ponting, Hussey, Clarke and Haddin are still going to be there.

It's not like we're going to be re-making the side through a baptism of fire.

And what if McDonald comes in and averages 20-something with the bat? Are we going to take him to England?

Sorry if you didn't quite get the gist of what I was trying to portray. Tours are a wonderful (and sometimes only) time for fringe players to get their opportunities.

There are a number of positions up for grabs at the moment. Taking a couple of younger players along gives them the chance to slot in if theres an injury or whatever.

With Symonds out, his position is still up for grabs. If Hussey keeps on floundering so is his. And Haddin .... ?

FFS, I wasn't talking about a whole makeover, just that some positions are still there for the taking, and OZ cannot keep relying on the older players as they'll be off to India at the drop of a hat (or cheque).

We must take the opportunity to blood some new, even if it is a bit risky.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

We must take the opportunity to blood some new, even if it is a bit risky.How about we just concentrate on winning the series?

And when people talk about "blooding new players", who are you actually talking about?

Phil Hughes, and who else?

Is there anyone?

Presumably, you'll be happy to see the 36-year-old Bryce McGain make his Test debut, as he's probably our best spinner, but where does that leave our exciting new youth policy?

[didak04]

Define current.

Last series?

Probably not, but it's not like we have an outstanding replacement. In light of that, you'd probably stick with the guy who had done the job over the past two years.

Does Hussey's current form warrant selection?

Stop trying to deflect.

If you want to discuss Hussey's place in the team make a thread about it, this thread is about Symonds.

The current form I refer to is what he has done over the summer in both the Test team and also for Queensland. He's struggled to hit the ball off the centre wicket area for the majority of the summer.

There are other candidates that deserve the number 6 slot far more than Symonds at the moment

[Blue Dimension]

How do you know?

Do you watch Symonds train?

Do you know how he conducts himself in the dressing room?

You're making a sweeping statement based on two piffling episodes that became public.

Two episodes that became public, and have resulted in his dumping from the Australian team not once, but twice.

You don't have to be Einstein to figure it out.

But i can't be bothered discussing this with posters on this forum anymore. He's been dropped from the side, and rightfully so due to his behavior, simple. Can't believe people are still trying to argue his point.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Stop trying to deflect.

If you want to discuss Hussey's place in the team make a thread about it, this thread is about Symonds.It's not a deflection.

I'm asking you whether the rule you impose on Symonds applies to other batsmen as well.

That's a totally legitimate point to raise.

Does Hussey's current form warrant selection?

He was worse than Symonds over the summer and has an inferior Test average over the past two years. If you reckon Symonds' performances over the summer were bad enough for him to be dropped on form, then why should Hussey be safe?

That is not a deflection.

The current form I refer to is what he has done over the summer in both the Test team and also for Queensland. He's struggled to hit the ball off the centre wicket area for the majority of the summer.Queensland form is irrelevant when a player has performed for Australia.

Should we have left Marsh out of the ODI side because he had been struggling for WA?

There are other candidates that deserve the number 6 slot far more than Symonds at the momentWho?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

But i can't be bothered discussing this with posters on this forum anymore. He's been dropped from the side, and rightfully so due to his behavior, simple. Can't believe people are still trying to argue his point.I'm not arguing that he should have been retained, even though I think that, when up and running he's still best XI.

All I'm saying is that the episodes on their own aren't enough to damn him.

I think it would have been the ensuing conversations that put Symonds in the shit.

[Admiral Afterworld]

Those episodes, on the surface, are no big deal.

Yeah, getting drunk the day before a game, that's "no big deal"...

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Yeah, getting drunk the day before a game, that's "no big deal"...No - it isn't.

Provided he wasn't roaming the streets at 6am, and there's nothing to suggest he was.

[didak04]

It's not a deflection.

I'm asking you whether the rule you impose on Symonds applies to other batsmen as well.

That's a totally legitimate point to raise.

Does Hussey's current form warrants selection?

He was worse than Symonds over the summer and has an inferior Test average over the past two years. If you reckon Symonds' performances over the summer were bad enough for him to be dropped on form, then why should Hussey be safe?

That is a not a deflection.

Queensland form is irrelevant when a player has performed for Australia.

Who?

You are trying to steer the conversation away from Andrew Symonds and onto Michael Hussey. That is a deflection.

For what it is worth the same rule should apply to everybody, but Hussey has at least shown in the past 2 one-dayers that return to form isn't too far away.

Saying that state form is irrelevant when a player has performed for Australia is a massive call to make. You are basically saying that if a player who has performed in the Test arena before becomes injured and makes their comeback via state cricket that the form they display at that level has no bearing on their position in the Test line-up? I just can't agree with that. If a player can't post double figure scores for their state then surely that would indicate to selectors that they're not in good enough form to represent the country, regardless of past Test form.

Marcus North, Michael Klinger and Andrew McDonald (on an all-round basis) all have significant claims to the number 6 slot.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You are trying to steer the conversation away from Andrew Symonds not Michael Hussey. That is a deflection.I'm not trying to steer it anywhere. This is still all about Symonds.

It just seems you have one standard for Symonds, and another standard for Hussey.

It's perfectly legitimate for me to point that out.

For what it is worth the same rule should apply to everybody, but Hussey has at least shown in the past 2 one-dayers that return to form isn't too far away.We're talking about Test cricket, aren't we?

If you reckon that Symonds' Test form was bad enough to be dropped on form, then I don't see how you can avoid making the same assessment on Hussey, who was much worse.

Saying that state form is irrelevant when a player has performed for Australia is a massive call to make. You are basically saying that if a player who has performed in the Test arena before becomes injured and makes their comeback via state cricket that the form they display at that level has no bearing on their position in the Test line-up?Well, there are variables. It would depend on how established the player was initially, how long they were out for and how successfully they were replaced.

Symonds was inarguably best XI. He missed one series. And his replacement struggled with the bat and then broke down.

So yeah, his form was Queensland was irrelevant.

Marcus North, Michael Klinger and Andrew McDonald (on an all-round basis) all have significant claims to the number 6 slot.Everything the selectors have done in the past two years indicates that we want an extra bowling option in the top six, so Klinger is out.

You reckon McDonald has the chops to bat top six in Test cricket? His FC record doesn't really suggest he'll be a Test-class number six. He deserves his shot, but if he can't make runs, he shouldn't stay.

And North has hardly set the world on fire this season. Averaging 38 with the bat, while taking 8 wickets at 34. How significant is his claim really?

You reckon these guys are all better-equipped than the guy who has averaged 55 in Test cricket over the past two years, bowls medium pace and off-spin, and is the best fielder in the world?

[CrazyQ]

AB is the best fielder in the world.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

AB is the best fielder in the world.Not as versatile as Symonds.

[bombersno1]

I am not a big fan of McDonald..but his FC average is the same as the arrogant tosser from QLD Gunner..and actually bowls a bit more!

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

No need to get personal regarding players.

I just find it intriguing that there could be so much love for Symonds this time last year, especially from BF posters. Now there is so much hate. Goes to show how loyal BF is.

Interesting, very interesting indeed.

[TheColeTrain]

No need to get personal regarding players.

I just find it intriguing that there could be so much love for Symonds this time last year, especially from BF posters. Now there is so much hate. Goes to show how loyal BF is.

Interesting, very interesting indeed.
If he wasn't a total ******** that took representing his country for granted he wouldn't have lost the support he had.
It is not that hard to understand, being a proud queenslander isn't enough I am sorry to say.

[Kram81]

Yeah, getting drunk the day before a game, that's "no big deal"...

Did you go around his house that night with a breath tester did you?

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

If he wasn't a total ******** that took representing his country for granted he wouldn't have lost the support he had.
It is not that hard to understand, being a proud queenslander isn't enough I am sorry to say.

That is such a simplistic way to look at it.

It all started in India in late 2007 with the monkey taunts and it continued and Singh got cleared off all charges when everyone knew that he had called Symonds a monkey.

CA gave him **** all support then, Symonds became disillusioned with the game, the love of the game was kicked out him.

It just goes to show how fickle you lot are, as long as his scoring runs and taking wickets you lot think his great. Then he encounters some problems and he loses his way, and you lot just hang shit on him and hang him out to dry.

You have to wonder about the stock some of you people came from, you lot make the English press look loyal. The Australian public is quickly morphing into whinging mass that wouldn't know what loyalty is. This type of attitude is characteristic of the English.

But hey, what else would i expect from a muse fan.

[baba ganush]

So what?

Aussies like to pretend they're all laidback and anything-goes, but when it comes to professional sportsmen, they turn into Fred Nile.


What a ridiculous statement.

How many Australians don't bother rocking up to work because they've 'gone fishing', and expect to retain their job?

How many Australians would expect to retain their job after representing their workplace on national radio, drunk, and slurring both a rival company's employee and a colleague's wife?

Most Australians know where the line is when it comes to work. It's nothing to do with Fred Nile. Your comparison is stupid and embarrassing.

[TheColeTrain]

Their comes a time when enough is enough.
The monkey thing happened a long time ago, it no longer cuts it as a excuse for poor off field behaviour and shit form.
Get your head out of your arse and remove those rose colored glasses.

Also why do you seem to think what music somebody listens to has any relevance?

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Their comes a time when enough is enough.
The monkey thing happened a long time ago, it no longer cuts it as a excuse for poor off field behaviour and shit form.
Get your head out of your arse and remove those rose colored glasses.

Also why do you seem to think what music somebody listens to has any relevance?

The monkey thing happened more or less a year ago, and then Symonds problems started. Just because Symonds has admitted he has a problem doesn't automatically mean that its fixed as soon as he admits it.

This is an ongoing issue and he deserves support. You lot are quite happy to take his good performances but spit in his face when he loses his way. Most muse fans are pretentious wankers, which applies here in this case.

[baba ganush]

It just seems you have one standard for Symonds, and another standard for Hussey.

It's perfectly legitimate for me to point that out.

We're talking about Test cricket, aren't we?


Another ridiculous comparison.

Symonds' form relates to injury and return from injury via domestic cricket.

It is not comparable to Hussey's predicament, as he hasn't left the side.

If you leave the team through injury/suspension, and show no form returning through domestic cricket, you don't have a right to be picked.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Symonds' form relates to injury and return from injury via domestic cricket.This is gibberish.

It is not comparable to Hussey's predicament, as he hasn't left the side.

If you leave the team through injury/suspension, and show no form returning through domestic cricket, you don't have a right to be picked.Players in the side still need to perform. On that basis, Symonds and Hussey are totally comparable.

If Symonds' Test form over the summer warrants him being dropped on form, then Hussey should also be in a precarious position.

As it happens, I reckon both are still best XI when fit and focused. I'm certainly not calling for Hussey to be axed. I'm merely identifying a double standard.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

What a ridiculous statement.

How many Australians don't bother rocking up to work because they've 'gone fishing', and expect to retain their job?

How many Australians would expect to retain their job after representing their workplace on national radio, drunk, and slurring both a rival company's employee and a colleague's wife?

Most Australians know where the line is when it comes to work. It's nothing to do with Fred Nile. Your comparison is stupid and embarrassing.I reckon you need to learn some new adjectives.

Your favourite ones are starting to sound a little hackneyed due to over-use. Ridiculous. Stupid. Embarrassing. It's a bit old hat.

Are you claiming that Symonds "slurred Matthew Hayden's wife"?

This is a perfect example of the shrill, OTT, phony outrage that accompanies so much of the comment on professional sportsmen. I don't think anything Symonds said on radio was particularly offensive. That said, I can understand how people have run out of patience with him.

[baba ganush]

This is gibberish.

Players in the side still need to perform. On that basis, Symonds and Hussey are totally comparable.


They're not comparable. Symonds had a significant period out of the side. Hussey didn't.


If Symonds' Test form over the summer warrants him being dropped on form, then Hussey should also be in a precarious position.

As it happens, I reckon both are still best XI when fit and focused. I'm certainly not calling for Hussey to be axed. I'm merely identifying a double standard.

It's not a double standard because the situations aren't similar.

[baba ganush]

I reckon you need to learn some new adjectives.

Your favourite ones are starting to sound a little hackneyed due to over-use. Ridiculous. Stupid. Embarrassing. It's a bit old hat.

Why invent words when the right ones already exist?


Are you claiming that Symonds "slurred Matthew Hayden's wife"?


Would you prefer 'objectified' or 'made inappropriate comments about'?

Typical Gunnar - concentrate on semantics rather than content.


This is a perfect example of the shrill, OTT, phony outrage that accompanies so much of the comment on professional sportsmen. I don't think anything Symonds said on radio was particularly offensive. That said, I can understand how people have run out of patience with him.

Your stupid comparison of people being unimpressed with 'going Fred Nile' is all that's of relevance here. If you can't understand how any company employee would be in serious trouble for what Symonds did, you live in a sports worship fairyland.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

They're not comparable. Symonds had a significant period out of the side. Hussey didn't.

It's not a double standard because the situations aren't similar.Symonds missed one series.

And even then, I don't see how that makes them totally incomparable.

They're still two Australian batsmen who are expected to score runs.

I'd say the similarity there is more important than the difference.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Would you prefer 'objectified' or 'made inappropriate comments about'?

Typical Gunnar - concentrate on semantics rather than content.I'm concentrating on you exaggerating Symonds' indiscretions to suit your argument.

His comments on radio were, while a bit bizarre, still pretty harmless. Let's not pretend they were worse than they were.

Your stupid comparison of people being unimpressed with 'going Fred Nile' is all that's of relevance here. If you can't understand how any company employee would be in serious trouble for what Symonds did, you live in a sports worship fairyland.I can understand why people have run out of patience with Symonds. I've said that already.

But the two incidents - gone fishing and the radio interview - aren't, in isolation, hanging offences. That's all I'm saying here.

I admit that I'm pretty accommodating of sportsmen. I guess I just don't really care if they have a few beers before an interview or miss a team meeting. I just see all that stuff as marginal. And I reckon that the stringent focus on their behaviour has strangled a lot of the colour out of sport. I like these guys to be a bit rough around the edges, and I think it's unrealistic to apply the same standards of behaviour that you would apply to office workers.

Sure, that might seem like a double standard. But, as you would say, it's not a double standard, because their situations aren't similar.

[baba ganush]

Symonds missed one series.

And even then, I don't see how that makes them totally incomparable.

They're still two Australian batsmen who are expected to score runs.

I'd say the similarity there is more important than the difference.

Then you're just putting Symonds in a golden light. A player returning through the domestic comp, who has a history of alcohol and discipline problems, who fails miserably with the bat in every game he plays, as well as drinking inappropriately and showing the same lack of discipline with his State team...well, the differences are huge actually.

As opposed to a player with a magnificent record who hasn't left the side going through a form slump.

[baba ganush]

I'm concentrating on you exaggerating Symonds' indiscretions to suit your argument.

His comments on radio were, while a bit bizarre, still pretty harmless. Let's not pretend they were worse than they were.

I guess you've never worked in a corporate environment.


I can understand why people have run out of patience with Symonds. I've said that already.

But the two incidents - gone fishing and the radio interview - aren't, in isolation, hanging offences. That's all I'm saying here.

As I said - transfer these to any corporate environment and the result would be severe.


I admit that I'm pretty accommodating of sportsmen. I guess I just don't really care if they have a few beers before an interview or miss a team meeting. I just see all that stuff as marginal. And I reckon that the stringent focus on their behaviour has strangled a lot of the colour out of sport. I like these guys to be a bit rough around the edges, and I think it's unrealistic to apply the same standards of behaviour that you would apply to office workers.

Sure, that might seem like a double standard. But, as you would say, it's not a double standard, because their situations aren't similar.

They're very similar. Symonds is a professional sportsman who represents CA. He isn't some rough and tumble grade cricketer. Perhaps he should be, then you can get your 'accommodation' with him at the local pub, where it should be, rather than on national radio.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Then you're just putting Symonds in a golden light. A player returning through the domestic comp, who has a history of alcohol and discipline problems, who fails miserably with the bat in every game he plays, as well as drinking inappropriately and showing the same lack of discipline with his State team...well, the differences are huge actually.

As opposed to a player with a magnificent record who hasn't left the side going through a form slump.But the argument was about whether Symonds should be dropped on form i.e. recent results at Test level this summer.

That's how the discussion kicked off.

Another poster said, and I'm paraphrasing, that Symonds had to be left out one way or another. If not for his behavioural issues, then for his shit performances at Test level.

I'm just taking umbrage with the claim that Symonds' recent performances at Test level, on their own, would be enough to see him dropped. He's averaged 55 at Test level over the past two years.

The drinking and poor discipline is a separate matter, but the disagreement is over whether Symonds' form at Test level was bad enough for him to be dropped. I don't think it was.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

They're very similar. Symonds is a professional sportsman who represents CA. He isn't some rough and tumble grade cricketer. Perhaps he should be, then you can get your 'accommodation' with him at the local pub, where it should be, rather than on national radio.I guess we just differ on the standards of behaviour we expect from professional sportsmen.

But I do think that Australians have become increasingly judgemental on this score in recent times. Sometimes, unnecessarily so.

[DIG]

No need to get personal regarding players.

I just find it intriguing that there could be so much love for Symonds this time last year, especially from BF posters. Now there is so much hate. Goes to show how loyal BF is.

Interesting, very interesting indeed.
You talk as if nothing's changed in a year.

Yes he got shafted by CA over the Singh affair but he needed to either grow a ****ing spine and get over it or quit from cricket completely, not show utter contempt for his teammates by missing a training camp to go fishing (and who knows what else that hasn't been reported), but still expect to be a walk-up start.

Fact is, right when we needed him the most, instead of knuckling down and giving it everything to beat our Indian and Saffy challengers, he's just gone off the rails.

Whatever "rehab" he's getting (for alcoholism??), he's a long way from international cricket team now and rightly so.

Has completely let Australian cricket down.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

You talk as if nothing's changed in a year.

Yes he got shafted by CA over the Singh affair but he needed to either grow a ****ing spine and get over it or quit from cricket completely, not show utter contempt for his teammates by missing a training camp to go fishing (and who knows what else that hasn't been reported), but still expect to be a walk-up start.Don't you reckon this is over-stating it a bit?

Utter contempt?

Come on. You're sick of Symonds, and that's fair enough. But let's keep it in perspective. He missed a team meeting. That's not the end of the world.

Fact is, right when we needed him the most, instead of knuckling down and giving it everything to beat our Indian and Saffy challengers, he's just gone off the rails.

Has completely let Australian cricket down. Whatever "rehab" he's getting (alcoholism??), I hope for his sake it works.I agree that, as a senior player, his timing and judgement has been poor.

He dropped the ball, and can't really expect to play for Australia again. Although, I think he probably will.

[didak04]

But the argument was about whether Symonds should be dropped on form i.e. recent results at Test level this summer.

That's how the discussion kicked off.

Another poster said, and I'm paraphrasing, that Symonds had to be left out one way or another. If not for his behavioural issues, then for his shit performances at Test level.

I'm just taking umbrage with the claim that Symonds' recent performances at Test level, on their own, would be enough to see him dropped. He's averaged 55 at Test level over the past two years.

The drinking and poor discipline is a separate matter, but the disagreement is over whether Symonds' form at Test level was bad enough for him to be dropped. I don't think it was.

Do you think that Hayden's form at Test level was bad enough for him to be dropped, or should he have been able to hang his hat on past performances and retain his place in the team too?

Carrying out of form players was a luxury that the Australian team had when they had other champion players to pick up the slack. With the state of the current team i don't feel they can do it any longer.

As for the Hussey/Symonds comparison that you are intent on raising, seeing as you seem to place so much emphasis on past performances then Hussey is going to win out over Symonds. He has more runs on the board than Symonds and seeing as all other form is irrelavent (in your eyes) he stays.

[baba ganush]

But the argument was about whether Symonds should be dropped on form i.e. recent results at Test level this summer.

Since when is form merely 'recent results at Test level'?


That's how the discussion kicked off.

Another poster said, and I'm paraphrasing, that Symonds had to be left out one way or another. If not for his behavioural issues, then for his shit performances at Test level.

Tests don't exist in a vacuum.


I'm just taking umbrage with the claim that Symonds' recent performances at Test level, on their own, would be enough to see him dropped. He's averaged 55 at Test level over the past two years.

Thilan Samaraweera averaged 89 over a certain period too. What a gun.


The drinking and poor discipline is a separate matter, but the disagreement is over whether Symonds' form at Test level was bad enough for him to be dropped. I don't think it was.

It's not separate at all.

[baba ganush]

I guess we just differ on the standards of behaviour we expect from professional sportsmen.

But I do think that Australians have become increasingly judgemental on this score in recent times. Sometimes, unnecessarily so.

I guess you're welcome to your opinion, but recognise that it's a limited one and most people expect, like any other highly paid employee, that a certain standard of behaviour is maintained by our sportsmen.

In my opinion, your attitude is too lenient and not appropriate for the professional sporting age. This isn't the 50s and 60s. These guys get paid big bucks, and they should be expected to act within certain boundaries.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Do you think that Hayden's form at Test level was bad enough for him to be dropped, or should he have been able to hang his hat on past performances and retain his place in the team too?.Hayden's form had been bad enough for long enough that a call needed to be made. His age was also a factor. He looked a player who had forgotten how to score runs, and it was probably too late in the day for him to recover.

In Hayden's last eight series, he averaged 40+ in just two. Against NZ and SA this summer, he averaged 10 and 19 respectively.

Symonds, by contrast, had only one bad series after a pretty solid two years.

So I think that comparison between Hayden and Symonds is a bit erroneous.

Carrying out of form players was a luxury that the Australian team had when they had other champion players to pick up the slack. With the state of the current team i don't feel they can do it any longer.Hussey is out of form at Test level.

Can we continue to carry him?

As for the Hussey/Symonds comparison that you are intent on raising, seeing as you seem to place so much emphasis on past performances then Hussey is going to win out over Symonds. He has more runs on the board than Symonds and seeing as all other form is irrelavent (in your eyes) he stays.But your argument is about form.

It's about how a player went last series. That was your whole argument for dropping Symonds.

Now you're adopting my argument about runs on the board.

You can't have it both ways.

I don't think Hussey should be dropped. I'm just pointing to his lean trot to highlight your double standard.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Since when is form merely 'recent results at Test level'?Well, when picking the Test side, that's the form that matters.

And, bottom line, those were the terms set out by the poster I was disagreeing with.

Thilan Samaraweera averaged 89 over a certain period too. What a gun.How long was that period?

Two years?

If so, I don't reckon he would have been dropped after one mediocre series.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

I guess you're welcome to your opinion, but recognise that it's a limited one and most people expect, like any other highly paid employee, that a certain standard of behaviour is maintained by our sportsmen.I expect a standard of behaviour – I'm not saying it's anything goes – but I don't see Symonds' behaviour as a major transgression of that.

He didn't assault anyone. He didn't commit a crime. He didn't gamble on a match. He didn't take drugs.

His indiscretions were small potatoes.

In my opinion, your attitude is too lenient and not appropriate for the professional sporting age. This isn't the 50s and 60s. These guys get paid big bucks, and they should be expected to act within certain boundaries.Plenty of people in the entertainment industry get paid big bucks and still act up.

Just because someone is employed by a record label or a movie studio - both corporations - it doesn't mean we, as a society, apply standards of behaviour in line with every other humdrum corporate environment.

So why insist on that standard when it comes to sportsmen?

Why pretend they are corporate drones rather than high profile entertainers?

[Gunnar Longshanks]

On the topic of naughty sportsmen:

Swim: IOC accepts Phelps apology for marijuana photo

The International Olympic Committee has expressed confidence MICHAEL PHELPS will learn from his "inappropriate behaviour" and continue to serve as a role model after a British newspaper published a photo of him inhaling from a marijuana pipe.

PHELPS, who won a record eight swimming gold medals at last year's Beijing Olympics, apologised and acknowledged "regrettable behaviour" after the picture was published on Sunday by the tabloid News of the World.

Marijuana is viewed differently from performance-enhancing drugs under World Anti-Doping Agency rules.

An athlete is subject to WADA sanctions only for a positive test that occurs during competition periods.

The News of the World said the picture was taken during a November house party while PHELPS was visiting the University of South Carolina.

The party occurred nearly three months after the Olympics while PHELPS was taking a long break from training, and his actions should have no impact on the eight golds he won at Beijing.

He has never tested positive for banned substances and the case is unlikely to fall under any doping rules.

[baba ganush]

Well, when picking the Test side, that's the form that matters.

And, bottom line, those were the terms set out by the poster I was disagreeing with.

Are you sure?

I would tend to think dismal domestic form should be taken into account. Combined with the other issues.


How long was that period?

Two years?

If so, I don't reckon he would have been dropped after one mediocre series.

Two years from 2001-2003 he averaged 67.16.

He has been in and out of the side since. He is a FTB. Sound familiar?

[baba ganush]

I expect a standard of behaviour – I'm not saying it's anything goes – but I don't see Symonds' behaviour as a major transgression of that.

He didn't assault anyone. He didn't commit a crime. He didn't gamble on a match. He didn't take drugs.

His indiscretions were small potatoes.

And in any corporate environment, they would still be punished severely.


Plenty of people in the entertainment industry get paid big bucks and still act up.

Just because someone is employed by a record label or a movie studio - both corporations - it doesn't mean we, as a society, apply standards of behaviour in line with every other humdrum corporate environment.

Incorrect. Entertainment industry stars are generally free agents who contract with whoever they like. And gee, when some of them act up they get dumped quick fast. Someone else may pick them up. That's the nature of it.


So why insist on that standard when it comes to sportsmen?

Why pretend they are corporate drones rather than high profile entertainers?

Because they are solely contracted by a company which expects them to display a certain standard of behaviour.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Are you sure?

I would tend to think dismal domestic form should be taken into account. Combined with the other issues.Should we have left Shaun Marsh out of the ODI side because he was struggling for WA?

Surely the fact he had made runs for Australia trumps whatever he was doing at state level.

Two years from 2001-2003 he averaged 67.16.

He has been in and out of the side since. He is a FTB. Sound familiar?FTB? First-time buyer?

So his period of good form was five or six years ago?

Of course that's not going to keep him in the side if he's struggled since.

By contrast, Symonds has had one mediocre series after doing the job over the past two-and-a-bit years. I reckon he's got a bit more grace before being dropped on form.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

Incorrect. Entertainment industry stars are generally free agents who contract with whoever they like. And gee, when some of them act up they get dumped quick fast. Someone else may pick them up. That's the nature of it.Sure, but society doesn't apply the same standards of behaviour to a movie star or a musician that it expects of a corporate accountant or whatever.

On that spectrum, I reckon sports stars are closer to the 'entertainer' model than the 'corporate drone' model.

At the very least, they should be considered as being somewhere in the middle, whereas you're arguing we should treat sports stars exactly as though they are office workers. I think that's unrealistic.

[blackhead&boil]

rofl.

I think Gunnar would be pretty down too at the moment :p Apparently the radio interview was only 'a storm in a teacup'..


more like a storm in a beer bottle, I'd say... :rolleyes:

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

You talk as if nothing's changed in a year.

Yes he got shafted by CA over the Singh affair but he needed to either grow a ****ing spine and get over it or quit from cricket completely, not show utter contempt for his teammates by missing a training camp to go fishing (and who knows what else that hasn't been reported), but still expect to be a walk-up start.

Fact is, right when we needed him the most, instead of knuckling down and giving it everything to beat our Indian and Saffy challengers, he's just gone off the rails.

Whatever "rehab" he's getting (for alcoholism??), he's a long way from international cricket team now and rightly so.

Has completely let Australian cricket down.


I think your over-stating it a bit, many seem to forget that when Symonds went fishing he didnt know the team meeting was on. It was called while he was out on his boat and he didnt realise until he got back.

There was a number of incidents in WI which had him on notice but still, Symonds hasnt let anyone down but himself. Lets get that straight, dont beat it up by saying he has let everyone in the country down. FFS, his a cricketer.

This whole thing started in the WI and it obvious there that Symonds had developed an anti-establishment focus towards CA. One thing led to another.

Symonds in the scheme of things seems to be a guy who gets himself into trouble without realising it. I dont think his intentionally flaunting the rules or giving everyone the forks. For example, he goes fishing on a day off and misses a meeting called after he leaves. He goes on radio and before he knows it his called a name. All he goes to the pub to have a drink in the corner and before he knows it some drunk young aussie bogan with leather skin at 21 is in his face with a camera.

It's not like his going out and brawling, or his jumping on top of a taxi or pissing on shop window.

I think he'll be back. And it will be interesting to gauge the response from BF when it does. Most posters on here seem to be very fickle and change their opinions on players based on their most recent performance rather then overall performance.

[baba ganush]

I think your over-stating it a bit, many seem to forget that when Symonds went fishing he didnt know the team meeting was on. It was called while he was out on his boat and he didnt realise until he got back.


load of shit.

[baba ganush]

Should we have left Shaun Marsh out of the ODI side because he was struggling for WA?

Surely the fact he had made runs for Australia trumps whatever he was doing at state level.

His average has plummeted since those first two knocks.

It was a lucky result, rather than a well-planned one.


FTB? First-time buyer?

:rolleyes:


So his period of good form was five or six years ago?

Of course that's not going to keep him in the side if he's struggled since.

By contrast, Symonds has had one mediocre series after doing the job over the past two-and-a-bit years. I reckon he's got a bit more grace before being dropped on form.

No, the point was that two years of good form means nothing, especially when, as with Symonds, the sample size was small and littered with not-outs.

[baba ganush]

Sure, but society doesn't apply the same standards of behaviour to a movie star or a musician that it expects of a corporate accountant or whatever.

On that spectrum, I reckon sports stars are closer to the 'entertainer' model than the 'corporate drone' model.

At the very least, they should be considered as being somewhere in the middle, whereas you're arguing we should treat sports stars exactly as though they are office workers. I think that's unrealistic.

When cricketers are free agents, you might have an argument.

Until then, they have an employer's code of conduct to follow - so no, they're not closer to entertainers.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

No, the point was that two years of good form means nothing, especially when, as with Symonds, the sample size was small and littered with not-outs.Two years of good form means nothing?

Come on - that's crazy.

Michael Clarke was recalled around the same time as Symonds. They've both done well since, but it's been the same amount of time for both.

If Clarke has a bad series in SA, will there be calls for him to be dropped on form?

Surely not. For Clarke, two years of good form would be enough to keep him safe, even after a mediocre series. As it should be for any player.

I don't think you can wave away the fact that Symonds has done a job at Test level since his last recall. Especially when outstanding alternatives are so thin on the ground.

P.S. I actually don't know what FTB stands for.

[Gunnar Longshanks]

When cricketers are free agents, you might have an argument.

Until then, they have an employer's code of conduct to follow - so no, they're not closer to entertainers.But I'm not disputing the CA decision. It's entirely their prerogative to manage their players the way they see fit.

I'm talking about the way the public judges sportsmen. And the distinction between contracted employee and free agent has nothing to do with that.

Why do you demand a higher standard of behavior from sportsmen than from actors or musicians?

Both are high profile entertainers.

In that sense, surely these sportsmen have more in common with actors and singers than with corporate accountants.

And surely the standard of behaviour that you impose on those sportsmen should reflect that.

[Juddism]

The monkey thing happened more or less a year ago, and then Symonds problems started. Just because Symonds has admitted he has a problem doesn't automatically mean that its fixed as soon as he admits it.

This is an ongoing issue and he deserves support. You lot are quite happy to take his good performances but spit in his face when he loses his way. Most muse fans are pretentious wankers, which applies here in this case.

didn't stop him from abusing McCullum, he does deserve support, that's all...the rest is up to him.

[bombersno1]

P.S. I actually don't know what FTB stands for.

Flat Track Bully..and I agree, most of Symonds' scores have been on flat pitches. I worry about him in England as the ball swings.

[Cousin Jed]

Ah we've missed you Gunnar...

[Belnakor]

ONFIDENTIAL hears Australian cricket vice-captain Michael Clarke won't be too unhappy with the dropping of Andrew Symonds from the team, despite boss Ricky Ponting being so.

It was widely reported the pair fell out after a bar argument over Symonds' drinking in the West Indies last year as Windies legend Brian Lara watched on.

But what's not so well known is that it ended with Symonds throwing a drink over Clarke.

They have not been mates since.

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

Nothing has been going right for Symonds lately, his luggage was lost by airline authorities when he travelled to Cairns for Jimmy Maher's fathers funeral. Consquently, he had no option but to attend the funeral in thongs, cargo shorts and collared shirt.

His also broken up this his long term girlfriend.

Hang in there champ!!!

[Ill Chicken]

He is a champion. Not a champ.

[baba ganush]

Two years of good form means nothing?

Come on - that's crazy.

Relative - not absolute. Stop your ridiculous semantic whinging.


Michael Clarke was recalled around the same time as Symonds. They've both done well since, but it's been the same amount of time for both.

If Clarke has a bad series in SA, will there be calls for him to be dropped on form?

Clarke has played more innings and has less not-outs in that period.


Surely not. For Clarke, two years of good form would be enough to keep him safe, even after a mediocre series. As it should be for any player.

If form existed in a vacuum.

[baba ganush]

But I'm not disputing the CA decision. It's entirely their prerogative to manage their players the way they see fit.

I'm talking about the way the public judges sportsmen. And the distinction between contracted employee and free agent has nothing to do with that.


Not true at all.


Why do you demand a higher standard of behavior from sportsmen than from actors or musicians?

Both are high profile entertainers.

In that sense, surely these sportsmen have more in common with actors and singers than with corporate accountants.

And surely the standard of behaviour that you impose on those sportsmen should reflect that.

I don't agree with you. Like most Australians, I recognise Symonds is a contracted CA player, not a grade scrubber. He has a duty to represent the code of conduct of his employer. Most Australians recognise this.

Your argument is baseless.