The Great Australian Debate

[Illinois Nazi]

Absoloutely nothing wrong with either 3 of these situations, first 2 the ball wasn't dead, the ball isn't dead until it has usually been in the keeper or fielders hands and held for a period of time and thrown to another fielder. The second one it wasn't shown if the umpire had signaled 4, if he hadn't the batsmen shouldn't assume it's 4 and therefore until the ball has been thrown back it is not dead. The last one is tough but the bowler was within his rights to go for the ball and then the fielding side take the bails off, just like If the ball hits the stumps or umpire or batsman and is caught it can be claimed as a catch. Grant Elliot learn to bat on a decent sized ground and you might not be so grumpy mate

The point isn't really whether the decisions were correct. It's more about the way people insist that the team should have "done the right thing", "spirit of cricket" etc. Such as the "obstructing" one in England last year.

Bottom line is, it's out under the laws if your team gets the wicket, it's against the spirit of the game if the opposition does.

 

[Gough]

Gideon Haigh recently described the Australian cricket team as being on a mission to prove that nice guys do finish last.

 

[psychobrown]

Yeah it's an interesting one OP, I voted rarely since I don't see too much wrong these days. I have to say though I do find the "what happens on the ground, stays on the ground" mantra silly. Of course players like Darren Lehmann and McGrath would support that, if not for the cameras picking them up we wouldn't know about their vicious racial abuse of players. I like how some commentators put it, there's an obvious difference between banter and being malicious about it, I do cringe at someone like Pug Warner for instance who charges in with his face all scrunched up looking like an Orc ready to battle for that shred of boar roasting over the fire, that looks bad, but there's nothing wrong with some byplay, a few jovial barbs and some passing comment that extracts deep psychological scars or past trauma between the two teams or personal performance. I don't care for this whole idea that the Australian Captaincy has to carry the mantle of Captain Grumpy though. Steve Smith seemed like a relaxed character, but when Michael Clarke - one of our most unpopular cricketers of all time - verbally berated him for being too "chummy" with the opposition, he seemed to take it to heart. I liked George Bailey as a skipper, he ran a tight ship but was good at communicating and keeping things cool, I hope American Dad finds his balance and doesn't feel the need to be the next Alan Border.

 

[King Elvis]

What about Singh's repeated racial abuse?

Which was then lied about and whitewashed due to threats of repercussions?

We are easily one of the best behaved teams, and easily one of the best spirited (when is the last time we cheated with cough lollies or sub fielders?) as well.

Occasionally, a player will lose their cool and overstep the mark - but unless it's a habitual thing, I wouldn't hang anyone for the rare misstep.

People who whinge about our behavior are generally people who don't follow cricket, or are losers in general.

The Windies side changed the rules of the game because they played with ruthless, dangerous aggression - yet people claim we played in poor spirit (note - I have no issues with the way the Windies played at their peak), and we do something wrong.

Our side were ruthless and dominated - and played with arrogance; so wimps and losers equate that to poor sportsmanship.

Perfect example is that sex offender, Peter Roebuck, his hysteria after that India/Sydney Test was embarrassing and disgraceful. Some would point at that as the low point of our cricket side in the last decade - yet no one can actually articulate what we did wrong; except win.

Cliffs; we play hard, we play ruthlessly and we play with arrogance - occasionally we overstep the mark... The same as everyone else.

 

[kickazz]

I'm not personally a fan of sledging but don't really have a problem with it either.

It gets slightly embarrassing though when an Aussie player comes out and talks about crossing the line, as if somehow we are the international arbiters of what is and isn't acceptable; and the sensibilities of different cultures or indeed individuals do not matter.