Buchanan was (partly) right

[beatnik]

can you believe the English team using the "part of the game" line after all their whingeing about Aussie sledging?

Sparks fly as Zaheer and Pietersen square up
Lawrence Booth at Trent Bridge
Monday July 30, 2007
The Guardian

The England wicketkeeper Matt Prior last night dismissed the spat between Zaheer Khan and Kevin Pietersen as "part of the game", despite the fact that the umpires were forced to intervene after Zaheer advanced on Pietersen brandishing his bat as tempers frayed on the third evening of the second Test.

England's frustrations had been building up all day as India batted their way into a position from which they are now favourites to take a 1-0 lead into the final Test at The Oval, and things boiled over when Zaheer edged his first ball past a diving Pietersen in the gully and away for four. Words were exchanged - believed to centre on the quality or otherwise of the shot - and when Zaheer began pointing his bat in Pietersen's direction, umpire Ian Howell walked over from square-leg to calm everyone down.

...

England have done little in recent weeks to dispel the notion that they are trying to cultivate a more hard-nosed image, and Prior, who repeatedly sledged Dinesh Karthik and Mahendra Singh Dhoni during the first Test at Lord's, defended his team's increasing garrulousness.

"We play the game hard, it is competitive and there's a lot at stake," he said. "Sometimes things boil over. It's a tough game. There are a lot of people under a lot of pressure. If you can do anything to get one up on your opponent you're going to do that, as long as it's kept in the spirit of the game. When you are fighting that hard, no one wants to take a step back, but from what I saw out there, nothing went over the line."

England are a noticeably more confrontational side than they once were, and the bowlers, too, appear to have been taking lessons in the art of what Steve Waugh called mental disintegration. Jimmy Anderson, who was fined half his match fee for deliberately barging into the West Indian batsman Runako Morton during a one-day international at Edgbaston earlier this month, is unrecognisable from the shy figure who used to steer clear of saying boo to a goose. Chris Tremlett accompanies almost every delivery with a Clint Eastwood glare, and even the mild-mannered Ryan Sidebottom has infused his repertoire with the odd clenched fist and red face.

...

Prior's comments suggest England will carry on with their policy of using what cricketers euphemistically call "verbals" to unsettle India, but defeat here will do nothing to dissuade critics that the tactic is a complete waste of time.

where is Sunil on this one?

 

[Cooldude]

When Aussies do it, we're labelled bullies. When England do it, it's okay but just a waste of time

 

[Grimreepah]

where is Sunil on this one?

Not sledging beatnik, they were showing competitive spirit

 

[davey_magik]

Poor old England, can't get anything right, look what Zaheer Khan did after they stirred him up with 'jellybeans on the pitch'.
Just on the jellybeans, is that legal if they were actually throwing them on the pitch?

 

[DIG]

can you believe the English team using the "part of the game" line after all their whingeing about Aussie sledging?



where is Sunil on this one?

I've never seen anything so hypocritical. Pathetic Poms.

 

[crownie]

on Pontings captaincy...

the beat up on this forum was a disgrace by Australians after we lost the ashes.

and im sure some who agree with the original poster were apart of it.

 

[beatnik]

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 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 *

sorry to self-bump but this most recent burst of double standards makes me surer than ever that the above is true

the goal posts have been moved once more because no-one can get near the Australians in the longer form of the game

Buchanan was right...

 

[rickyp]

I don't get what people are on about with this spirit of the game rubbish, if your playing international sport (yes all sports) you arent there to make sure everyone has a good time, you are there to win and nothing else. Winning at all costs is the attitude which has been and should be adapted by the Australian cricket team, thats why we are winners, and so far ahead of the pack.

Great OP Beatnik, true then, true now.

 

[Cousin Jed]

Wow.

Awesome post!!

Better send this off to Roebuck and Company.

 

[Smokey_22]

Beatnik you need to add a paragraph at the bottom that relates to the latest incident, then send this to the media. If not, can someone else do it and source it????

 

[arzach]

Holy crap, I just read this whole thread without realising it was originally posted 10 months ago!!! Wasn't a single post that tipped me off it was all so topical.

I initially miss read the title as "Bucknor was (partly) right"

Just simply an outstanding and prophetic post.

Does anyone have any contacts to be able to get this published somewhere?

 

[Judd4PM]

I just read the whole thread aswel not knowing when it was originally posted.

Best post I have ever read, well done.

 

[Copernicus]

It's a shame the rest of the media cannot be so incisive as this post is about the matter.

No, better to rely on hyperbole and the hysterics of the Indian showboaters.

 

[placebo]

Great Post!

 

[The Flying Belgian]

I also, was reading the post from page one without looking at the dates, thinking "gee beato's nailed it". Hasn't lost any currency.

 

[footyfreak]

sorry to self-bump but this most recent burst of double standards makes me surer than ever that the above is true

the goal posts have been moved once more because no-one can get near the Australians in the longer form of the game

Buchanan was right...

no need to apologise mate. I thought it was a great post back in April and now i just think your bloody Nostradamus

 

[Crimson Azure]

Some good points made, if only the media could adhere to a similar level of impartiality.

The insipid way in which the ICC are trying to cater to India is completely transparent

And as for the ex-cricketers they have shown themselves to be self righteous, jealous & judgmental. This is all because they could not reach the great heights of the Australian team & have not been able to help their country to compete with the juggernaut that is Australian cricket.

I remember doing a similar thing to what the Indian team did when things weren’t going my way, I once threatened to take my ball & bat & go home as I thought my dismissal was unjust & the rules were not in my favour.

By the way I was eight.

Grow up India!

 

[Yaaablett]

I wish I read this a few days ago! I have spent the past few days and 6-7 posts trying to say aexactly that and never quite nailing it.

Should we accept that the majority of Australians have a problem with sportspeople having continued world success? Do they like only the underdog to show fight and absolute determination to win at all costs? The underdog is brave while the same trait in the favourite and champion is coinsidered arrogant and showing poor spirit or sportsmanship. They demand that the winners be humble, friendly, kind individuals, relying on only their natural ability to get them by.

It was mentioned in a post here somewhere that we rejoiced when Border and co took on the world between 87 and 93. The aussies were brash, aggressive and bowed to no-one. All Australia loved it. They do the same now and because of the outstanding run of success and with the mantle of clearly the best team in the world they are scorned because of it.

Its a strange mentality.

 

[Butane]

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 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 *

Surperb post. Sensational in fact, and to think it was written well before this debacle.

 

[LIONS then DAYLIGHT]

At the end of the day, when people are trying to drag you down, you know your at the front of the pack.

Sunil Gavaskar is an idiot, i heard his commentary when Michael Clarke took that catch.

Disgraceful.

India came here being quitely confident of Victory especially considering they were probably unlucky not to win back in 2003 on these shores.

Then it took just under two weeks for them to lose, they claimed umpires were against them and that Ponting's team were not playing in the spirit of the game.

They happened to forget about the umpiring during the 2001 Indian series in India, they forgot about the pitch doctoring in 2004 and they forgot about their OWN PLAYERS being reported for numerous offences over the years.

The Australian public almost felt robbed of a contest, especially after Symonds was caught behind and went on to score a century.

Letters were written to newspapers dramatically saying that they left the game early as they felt the game had lost its soul, how could a player joyously celebrate a ton after being clearly out.

They said it wouldnt have happened back in their day, editorials were written by social experts claiming that the symonds episode was reflective of modern society, interviews were done with experts, current affair programs examined the situation, analysising every point.

As i said, people longing for a contest felt that the Symonds ton robbed India, and as such the contest was ruined, Symonds and Ponting had ****ed it all they said.

This was the first few days, before the racism issue exploded.

India came to bat, people wanted Tendulkar to get a ton, Laxman played magnificently, the scribes were in glee, a fightback had come, it was forgotten that Laxman was as plumb as they come when he was in his 30's. This fact was forgotten.

Instead pieces were written about the beauty of the innings, one piece said that members of the 1948 invincibles watching at the ground were in awe.

The next day Tendulkar came to bat, he was as plumb as they come as well, he went on to score a ton. One might have felt that now the symons mistake had been cancelled out.

No mention was made of this, Australia was under the pump, India were getting closer and closer to the first innings.

Singh came into bat with Tendulkar, tempers flared. At some stage words were spoken, a racist comment was apparently made.

TV statiosn and radio crews said that the match was getting some fire back at the obvious confrontation, little did they know what had been said.

That night a late news bulletin suggest a Singh would be charged with making a racist remark.

Australia went on to claim a famous win, Scribes demanded Ponting be sacked, he shouldnt have reported singh they said, he was a dobber, however, this was not the first time the issue had been raised. Singh was a repeat offender the Aussies claimed.

Alas, people were lost, torn betweent the fact that a contest had apparently been ruined by a players refusal to walk.

The backlash begun.

After the 2005 Ashes a similar backlash begun, the Australians wanted to win, and their team didnt. They wanted to change.

Cool heads prevailed within this heat.

Then after recording their 16th straight win.

A similar backlash begun.

I ask you?

What is the deal?

 

[Copernicus]

I wish I read this a few days ago! I have spent the past few days and 6-7 posts trying to say aexactly that and never quite nailing it.

Should we accept that the majority of Australians have a problem with sportspeople having continued world success? Do they like only the underdog to show fight and absolute determination to win at all costs? The underdog is brave while the same trait in the favourite and champion is coinsidered arrogant and showing poor spirit or sportsmanship. They demand that the winners be humble, friendly, kind individuals, relying on only their natural ability to get them by.

It was mentioned in a post here somewhere that we rejoiced when Border and co took on the world between 87 and 93. The aussies were brash, aggressive and bowed to no-one. All Australia loved it. They do the same now and because of the outstanding run of success and with the mantle of clearly the best team in the world they are scorned because of it.

Its a strange mentality.

Well said. It's a duality that just doesn't make any sense, EXCEPT if you take into account the Tall Poppy Syndrome.

This ideal will continue to drag the country down, and is exactly the reason the Australian cricket team is the source of so much ire. They play hard, they play well, and to top it off, they WIN. Time to get out those shears...

 

[Joffaboy]

This thread should be a sticky.

The truth in one thread.

Killer thread of this forum.

Drag us down to their mediocrity is the only way to beat us - and they know it.

The Jealousy is legion.

 

[Adelaide Hawk]

I just get so annoyed by the suggestion that Australia is not showing respect for other countries with our celebrations. Criticism is always levelled at Australians that we don't take into account the cultural differences. Apparently we are supposed to not only understand the idiosyncrasies of Indian people, we are also expected to accept them.

Well. I'll turn that around and ask why it is that Indian cricketers feel no need to accept the culture of the Australian sportsman?

When I travel overseas, I make special effort to observe other countries' cultures, as to not cause international incident. It's a case of "when in Rome, do as the Romans do". Why is it that the Indian cricketers cannot accept how things are done in Australia? Why do they still think that although we are in Australia, we have to do what Indians demand?

If they don't like it here, they are free to leave .. and as soon as possible as far as I'm concerned, and they can take whingers like Gavaskar, Greig and Roebuck with them.

 

[DT_fanatic]

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

so what about claiming catches that have bounced?
ponting's countless arguments with umpires?
damien martyn's one finger salute to a cameraman?
darren lehmann's racist remark at murali?
mcgrath's spat with sarwan?
mark waugh's match fixing allegations? (only cleared by his own cricket board, surprise surprise)

these incidents are just off the top of my head, im sure there are more. now im not saying that my own team or any others aren't guilty of similar and/or other events but don't make it look like the australians have been put down by a 'bored cricket media pack' for their arrogance because there's nothing else to use.

also, doctoring pitches is hardly what i'd refer to as an 'evil' - the australians may not be explicitly doing it but any knowledgable cricket fan will know that grounds like perth are always set up to suit the australians as much as possible. countries around the world are simply doing the same. if anything really, especially in india, there is LESS doctoring of the pitches going on...they are no where near as helpful for spin as they used to be.

walking off the field, correct me if im wrong but you're referring to gavaskar arent you? a one off incident that occurred 20+ years ago?

fighting fire with fire...

* 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

how have the first two points got any significant relevance? clashing with an opposition player (it was just an eyeball IIRC) is just as good as personal sledging which the australians have been known to do. either that or you can go back to mcgrath's spat with sarwan.
as for harmison hitting langer, well as far as i remember they were with legally bowled bouncers, please don't tell me the aussies haven't done that before.

pietersen talks trash = sledging. again, nothing different here.

how many times has mcgrath talked up his bunnies and the like? how is that not baiting as well?

 

[DIG]

Great bump.

The OP remains one of the best ever seen on this forum, and is still spot on today. Good to read again.