Are Australian cricket fans the worst in the world?

[frankrizzo]

Langer also said after that independent report a while back that everything was fine now and players were all happy yet the players had to go yet again to CA to report concerns about his behavior after that report, its almost like this bloke is delusional about how people saw him or he is just very comfortable lying to he media about all this.

I dont actually think he is lying langer truly believes he did an amazing job and that the majority of the team think he did an amazing job and that they didnt have issues with his behavior, langer believing that doesnt make it anything close to the on the ground reality though.

 

[Carbine Chaos]

There seems to be two distinct sides on this when, let’s be honest, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle.

 

[frankrizzo]

Thats probably why CA hired independent experts who deal with this stuff for a living, they didnt make their decisions based on either sides word alone but based on the professional opinion of unbiased experts.

 

[Gethelred]

if that is their attitude i don't like it tbh.

I think there's a bit of a disconnect at play here.

We grew up with cricket being an exclusively summer thing. Sure, we knew England had winters during our summers and the players could and would go on tour, but for the vast majority of us outside the hardcore nuffies who've known Alan Border's batting average from the cradle cricket was a summer thing. This holds true for the country's attendance figures for the T20 world cup and the most recent ODI series, as throwaway as it was; this country treats cricket as something that happens in mid December to late Jan/mid February. As such, we look at cricket as though it only occurs in that period.

But contemporary cricket is so much larger than that. You've got cricket going on everywhere in the world all the time. In an interview with the Grade Cricketer since his injury - so, recently - Glenn Maxwell said that the only time he could take a break was if he chose to; there were offers for him worldwide to play nonstop. In the ABC coverage, they had Ravi Bopara commentating, and he mentioned that he was being offered money to play cricket in America. Ravi Bopara. He's not breaking any grandstands to get someone to watch him play. You've got the IPL, PSL, CPL, BB, the Hundred; there are 13 different major T20 competitions worldwide, across the northern and southern hemisphere.

You've got any number of poorer countries sending players out to play for their nation, and they simply cannot compete without ICC funding to supplement their wages. In Australia, we at least have the relatively decent level of subsidization that allows us to retain the best players anyway, and yet we still need to parachute in Tim David into our T20 world cup side.

The reason this is relevant is that this disconnect breeds your opinion. You don't like their attitude because it's mercenary. You don't like it because they're earning a living when they should be playing for 5 months a year when the weather's good, and should feel grateful for the chance to play for their country in a field they can earn wildly more money playing for 12 months a year. You don't want to see the depth of Australian cricket; why isn't this like the '90's, when Australia could win any tournament they walked into just by flexing Matt Hayden's biceps? Gotta have the best out there; except the best at each format aren't necessarily great at the other formats, and there's a degree of tactical and technical specialization at play these days that is actively being avoided in media for some reason. You cannot simply use test match tactics in an ODI or a T20, nor can you use T20 tactics in a test match; that this for some reason is completely avoided by the talking heads is illuminating, I think, of the degree to which they want us to interact with cricket.

The point of this is thus: you're not actually losing anything by the players being mercenaries, maximizing their earnings while they can. You're still getting some pretty excellent cricket. Your problem isn't really to do with the players, either; it's a capitalism problem as opposed to a player selfishness problem. You're suffering from a widely perpetuated disconnect based off nostalgia, and that's okay to an extent.

 

[Gough]

I think there's a bit of a disconnect at play here.

We grew up with cricket being an exclusively summer thing. Sure, we knew England had winters during our summers and the players could and would go on tour, but for the vast majority of us outside the hardcore nuffies who've known Alan Border's batting average from the cradle cricket was a summer thing. This holds true for the country's attendance figures for the T20 world cup and the most recent ODI series, as throwaway as it was; this country treats cricket as something that happens in mid December to late Jan/mid February. As such, we look at cricket as though it only occurs in that period.

But contemporary cricket is so much larger than that. You've got cricket going on everywhere in the world all the time. In an interview with the Grade Cricketer since his injury - so, recently - Glenn Maxwell said that the only time he could take a break was if he chose to; there were offers for him worldwide to play nonstop. In the ABC coverage, they had Ravi Bopara commentating, and he mentioned that he was being offered money to play cricket in America. Ravi Bopara. He's not breaking any grandstands to get someone to watch him play. You've got the IPL, PSL, CPL, BB, the Hundred; there are 13 different major T20 competitions worldwide, across the northern and southern hemisphere.

You've got any number of poorer countries sending players out to play for their nation, and they simply cannot compete without ICC funding to supplement their wages. In Australia, we at least have the relatively decent level of subsidization that allows us to retain the best players anyway, and yet we still need to parachute in Tim David into our T20 world cup side.

The reason this is relevant is that this disconnect breeds your opinion. You don't like their attitude because it's mercenary. You don't like it because they're earning a living when they should be playing for 5 months a year when the weather's good, and should feel grateful for the chance to play for their country in a field they can earn wildly more money playing for 12 months a year. You don't want to see the depth of Australian cricket; why isn't this like the '90's, when Australia could win any tournament they walked into just by flexing Matt Hayden's biceps? Gotta have the best out there; except the best at each format aren't necessarily great at the other formats, and there's a degree of tactical and technical specialization at play these days that is actively being avoided in media for some reason. You cannot simply use test match tactics in an ODI or a T20, nor can you use T20 tactics in a test match; that this for some reason is completely avoided by the talking heads is illuminating, I think, of the degree to which they want us to interact with cricket.

The point of this is thus: you're not actually losing anything by the players being mercenaries, maximizing their earnings while they can. You're still getting some pretty excellent cricket. Your problem isn't really to do with the players, either; it's a capitalism problem as opposed to a player selfishness problem. You're suffering from a widely perpetuated disconnect based off nostalgia, and that's okay to an extent.

Cricket is in direct competition with American sports and European football leagues in a way that it never was when the scores in Monday's paper and an hour highlights package were the only way to follow them.

 

[Kwality]

There is no reason to believe the evolution of the game will slow.

 

[Gethelred]

Yes. The last few days of handwringing and whining are easy evidence.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Yes. The last few days of handwringing and whining are easy evidence.

We don’t accept a team giving up. The team can lose but show some pride and don’t throw in the towel the minute it gets hard.

 

[Gethelred]

We don’t accept a team giving up. The team can lose but show some pride and don’t throw in the towel the minute it gets hard.

Luke, you're a prime example of what I'm talking about.

The word 'context' isn't in your vocabulary. Cricket, for all that you talk about it, doesn't involve anyone other than the Australian team; it is spoken about by you only in terms of begrudging success or inadequacy.

 

[LukeParkerno1]

Luke, you're a prime example of what I'm talking about.

The word 'context' isn't in your vocabulary. Cricket, for all that you talk about it, doesn't involve anyone other than the Australian team; it is spoken about by you only in terms of begrudging success or inadequacy.

They deserve every single criticism over that performance from past players (Border etc) to fans. We shouldn’t get to a stage where we Pat a team on the bat for losing like that. There is losing, and you can be outplayed but as long as you show an ounce of fight then you accept that as fans. There is always a winner and loser that’s sport. However can those players honestly and I mean honestly say they tried their absolute best with a few exceptions (Murphy, Smith and I will give Lab/Carey passes). The rest were barely 2/10 standard.

We don’t expect to win every match, we expect to show that they care and give their absolute best. That’s all we expect

 

[Pistol Night]

Comfortably the most abusive towards their own.

 

[sherb]

Yes. The last few days of handwringing and whining are easy evidence.

The performance in the first Test was fully deserving of the overall reaction it got here. Having said that, of course there were some over the top reactions, there always are.

It wasn't the loss, it was the nature of the loss that was the problem.

If we had busted our backsides - showing application, discipline and ticker in the process - and the reaction here had been the same, well then I would happily agree with you.

 

[JackOutback]

Comfortably the most abusive towards their own.

Don't think we've ever attacked a player's house, though.

 

[Gethelred]

The performance in the first Test was fully deserving of the overall reaction it got here. Having said that, of course there were some over the top reactions, there always are.

It wasn't the loss, it was the nature of the loss that was the problem.

If we had busted our backsides - showing application, discipline and ticker in the process - and the reaction here had been the same, well then I would happily agree with you.

I don't think there were many stops that weren't pulled from India's end to win that game, and absolutely everything went right. Jadeja out injured for two months; didn't skip a beat. We win the toss and elect to bat; we're 2/2. How many umpire's calls go their way in the test, all of em?

There's three tests to go. India got skittled for 36 on their last tour of our shores in the first test. Let's see how we go.

 

[corbies]

Meh when they win, outraged when they lose. That is the Australian cricket fans m.o.

 

[Blue1980]

The performance in the first Test was fully deserving of the overall reaction it got here. Having said that, of course there were some over the top reactions, there always are.

It wasn't the loss, it was the nature of the loss that was the problem.

If we had busted our backsides - showing application, discipline and ticker in the process - and the reaction here had been the same, well then I would happily agree with you.

Deserve criticism sure, and how their words aren’t backed up by actions (mainly around preparation for me).

However, when people want Cummins dropped, Lyon dropped, Labashange is s**t, Langer wouldn’t of let this happen, side doesn’t hurt enough, too woke etc etc then it gets really stupid.

It’s to be expected though, lots of emotional reactions.

There is also this myth that no Aussie sides in the past crumbled. I mean sure it was super rare from 99-08, but we got flogged in India in 98 and happened a fair bit overseas before then as well.

I guess herein lies a problem, we had possibly the greatest side ever assembled and we are comparing them to that. Even that side only managed one series win.

I know this current side is saying they want to be ranked up there and win overseas etc but a few issues:

A) they aren’t as good as that side which won over there. Out of the current side probably only Smith, Cummins and Hazelwood or Starc would get a game in the Aussie side of say 2004. We have extra depth in fast bowling compared to then, but that’s useless in India.

B) Preparation. We prepared well in 2017, and even though we didn’t win the series we were up for the fight. Plus we had Smith batting like Bradman. Having guys in the big bash and having a week pretending North Sydney was an Indian dust bowl clearly wasn’t the answer. That holds even if we bounce back for the next 3 tests, first test preparation was terrible.

C) Plans. We had them when we won in 2004, we learnt from 2001. Need to restrict boundaries, don’t over attack when bowling. Cummins was bowling like he thought he was in England or Australia early on, and Rohit carved him up.

D) pitches are very different than 2004 where we played 3 seamers with Warne and won. Even last time Pune was a crapshoot which we won mainly thanks to Smith heroics (and SOK of course). These pitches render paceman almost meaningless, though getting bowled out for 177 puts you way behind the 8 ball.

 

[Blue1980]

Meh when they win, outraged when they lose. That is the Australian cricket fans m.o.

I think that is largely due to test cricket in general, momentum seems a very hard thing to stop.

So when we win it looks too easy (basically most of the time at home) and when we lose it looks like we just give up (2nd test v SL and this recent test).

I think it’s a combination of home ground advantage being greater in cricket than other sports plus inadequate preparation sides have for tours nowadays, also factor in pitches tailor made to suit home team strengths.

I’d like something done to mitigate these factors in general, as I’d like to see more competitive tests, regardless of whether we are winning or losing.

 

[Blue1980]

Don't think we've ever attacked a player's house, though.

That’s where we are going wrong?

It’s not the players who don’t care enough, it’s us!

 

[Westend]

nah still the poms

 

[Blue1980]

nah still the poms

Their newspapers make them seem like masochists, though they probably are.

Get off more on losing than winning.

 

[JackOutback]

That’s where we are going wrong?

It’s not the players who don’t care enough, it’s us!

Worth a shot

 

[Around the Wicket]

Issue is we are dominate in our conditions or similar (NZ / Decent in South Africa) but when conditions don't favour batting eg. Sub continent / England we s**t the bed and can't perform.

Core of this team have been around for some time now and have nothing apart from a boring ass series in Pakistan and a series in NZ.

 

[Around the Wicket]

Put it this way if this Australia team can't beat England this Ashes it will be embarrassing.

We have 3 quicks who are in the prime of there careers with extensive records / experience, experienced off spinner, world class all rounder and what should be a settled batting lineup.

 

[Rabish Binney]

Cant recall an Australian crowd in unison chanting monkey sounds towards an opposition player?

 

[Around the Wicket]

Cant recall an Australian crowd in unison chanting monkey sounds towards an opposition player?

I really don't get how Symonds got so offended by that LoL