beatnik
Grizzled veteran
having read Sunil Gavaskar's criticisms of Australia's attitude, I was reminded of a prediction by John Buchanan that at the time seemed to me to be a little paranoid and yet several years on, he seems to have been proven (at least partly) correct
first some background...
Buchanan predicted several years ago that Australia were so dominant that the rules of the game would end up being changed (read more)
what actually happened is that the rules changed 'off' the field rather than on
having broken all manner of records, the Aussies were set upon for not being 'nice guys' - their cricket could not be criticised so other teams and a largely-bored cricket media pack started to pick at the smallest things
the Aussies were not tampering with the ball, doctoring or tampering pitches, abusing spectators, walking off the field, forfeiting matches, taking drugs (granted, one took a masking agent) but apparently all of these things were lesser evils than...wait for it...being too self-confident and reminding others of just how good they were
nice guys...
so regardless of the apparent double standard, the Aussies tried to be 'nicer guys', particularly leading into the 2005 Ashes series:
Punter tried to implement an honour system for fielders claiming catches...and were were told to stick it by the newly (and temporarily it turned out) agressive Poms
Gilly pioneered the concept of walking...and was criticised for trying to manipulate umpires
...in short, the Aussies were damned if they did, damned if they didn't
fighting fire with fire...
then we lost The Ashes as the English caught us on the hop with a brand of attacking and aggressive cricket - England were right to be congratulated on playing with such spirit after years of defeat, it was possibly the most exciting series in the past 5-10 years and brought Test cricket alive once more
* when Collingwood clashed with Hayden, he was described as brave and assertive;
* when Harmison hit Langer repeatedly, the world applauded the tough, uncompromising brand of cricket being played;
* when Pietersen talked trash to the Aussies, the bleating masses admired his pluck;
* when Fletcher baited Punter in the press; he was simply being a masterful tactician
the aftermath...
I hear you ask, was there any respect or compassion shown to the vanquished 'nice guy' Aussies who lost the Ashes but made a few new 'mates'?
other than Freddie Flintoff there was none of course - only weeks of excessive celebrations, premature predictions of the Aussie demise and claims of a new era of English cricket...the world joyously tap-danced on the supposed grave of Australian cricket dominancerolleyes: )
across the world, the Aussies were called soft; some players were said to be too 'chummy' with the enemy; Ponting's captaincy was questioned - apparently the Aussies had taken their collective eye off the ball and were too concerned with the niceties of the game rather than winning
hook. line. sinker.
double standards...
so Ponting went on a mission to turn his team into a hard, mean Test-winning machine and mentally devastated a new generation of English cricketers Down Under but were the Australians similarly applauded for their attacking, uncompromising cricket?
hell no, instead one of the ICC official representatives - that racist little teapot Sunil Gavaskar - has slipped back into sad and childish sniping of the world champions
he has made no criticisms of Pakistan protecting drug cheats, ball tamperers and pitch doctorers; no condemnation of the disturbing English lack of team spirit this summer; nothing on the appalling comments by one H. Gibbs (which incidentally seem to have been modelled on Sunil's own published racial steretypes); nothing about the bitterly divisive inner (and often outer) turmoil his favoured Indians have experienced in the past two years
but he has found time to dust off that old chestnut, "the Aussies call me names", just prior to a World Cup campaign! his timing is so poor as to be comical - India's political power within the ICC obviously means he can make innappropriate comments without fear of being called to account for his conflict-of-interest
as I said, Buchanan was partly right - the cricket world did move the goal posts but it was insidous and petty rather than transparently progressive
I hope that Punter and co. do not fall for the 'be a nice guy' trap again -as long as they play within the rules of the game, results are all that matter
* steps down from soap box *
first some background...
Buchanan predicted several years ago that Australia were so dominant that the rules of the game would end up being changed (read more)
what actually happened is that the rules changed 'off' the field rather than on
having broken all manner of records, the Aussies were set upon for not being 'nice guys' - their cricket could not be criticised so other teams and a largely-bored cricket media pack started to pick at the smallest things
the Aussies were not tampering with the ball, doctoring or tampering pitches, abusing spectators, walking off the field, forfeiting matches, taking drugs (granted, one took a masking agent) but apparently all of these things were lesser evils than...wait for it...being too self-confident and reminding others of just how good they were
nice guys...
so regardless of the apparent double standard, the Aussies tried to be 'nicer guys', particularly leading into the 2005 Ashes series:
Punter tried to implement an honour system for fielders claiming catches...and were were told to stick it by the newly (and temporarily it turned out) agressive Poms
Gilly pioneered the concept of walking...and was criticised for trying to manipulate umpires
...in short, the Aussies were damned if they did, damned if they didn't
fighting fire with fire...
then we lost The Ashes as the English caught us on the hop with a brand of attacking and aggressive cricket - England were right to be congratulated on playing with such spirit after years of defeat, it was possibly the most exciting series in the past 5-10 years and brought Test cricket alive once more
* when Collingwood clashed with Hayden, he was described as brave and assertive;
* when Harmison hit Langer repeatedly, the world applauded the tough, uncompromising brand of cricket being played;
* when Pietersen talked trash to the Aussies, the bleating masses admired his pluck;
* when Fletcher baited Punter in the press; he was simply being a masterful tactician
the aftermath...
I hear you ask, was there any respect or compassion shown to the vanquished 'nice guy' Aussies who lost the Ashes but made a few new 'mates'?
other than Freddie Flintoff there was none of course - only weeks of excessive celebrations, premature predictions of the Aussie demise and claims of a new era of English cricket...the world joyously tap-danced on the supposed grave of Australian cricket dominance
rolleyes: ) across the world, the Aussies were called soft; some players were said to be too 'chummy' with the enemy; Ponting's captaincy was questioned - apparently the Aussies had taken their collective eye off the ball and were too concerned with the niceties of the game rather than winning
hook. line. sinker.
double standards...
so Ponting went on a mission to turn his team into a hard, mean Test-winning machine and mentally devastated a new generation of English cricketers Down Under but were the Australians similarly applauded for their attacking, uncompromising cricket?
hell no, instead one of the ICC official representatives - that racist little teapot Sunil Gavaskar - has slipped back into sad and childish sniping of the world champions
he has made no criticisms of Pakistan protecting drug cheats, ball tamperers and pitch doctorers; no condemnation of the disturbing English lack of team spirit this summer; nothing on the appalling comments by one H. Gibbs (which incidentally seem to have been modelled on Sunil's own published racial steretypes); nothing about the bitterly divisive inner (and often outer) turmoil his favoured Indians have experienced in the past two years
but he has found time to dust off that old chestnut, "the Aussies call me names", just prior to a World Cup campaign! his timing is so poor as to be comical - India's political power within the ICC obviously means he can make innappropriate comments without fear of being called to account for his conflict-of-interest
as I said, Buchanan was partly right - the cricket world did move the goal posts but it was insidous and petty rather than transparently progressive
I hope that Punter and co. do not fall for the 'be a nice guy' trap again -as long as they play within the rules of the game, results are all that matter
* steps down from soap box *
