Glorious summer made dark by the sins of talk

John Benaud,View
Saturday 25 January 2003 20:00 EST
Comments

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

It seems illogical to mention the name John McEnroe in conjunction with leather on willow, but because his petulant past was such a blast it's appropriate, and might help us better relate to a darker side of one of Australian cricket's brightest summers. The inconsequential has flushed out the intemperate.

All McEnroe served up was valid criticism of sloppy, second-rate play by an Australian when he was commentating on the Open tennis event, but he was confronted by the player's coach/brother, demanding he step out into the car park for a bit of fisticuffs at sunset.

More substantial boof-headedness blighted the cricket when, on a hot Gabba night, Darren Lehmann succumbed, it's said, to some minor gamesmanship (aka sledging) from the Sri Lankans, about his shape being relative to his slowness. Not only did the International Cricket Council ban Lehmann for five matches for being racist but the feminists in Tasmania wanted his balls for being sexist.

Can we really believe such a journeyman as Lehmann could be stirred by a schoolboy sledge? It's not so long ago that a rookie South African Test batsman accused Matthew Hayden of "super-sledging" and the Steve Waugh camp confessed to "practising the art of mental disintegration". So any practising Australian cricketer should be sledge-proof, yes? The admission also suggests professional team planning, which raises a serious question about the Australian Cricket Board's attitude to sledging. The ACB have "form" when it comes to soft discipline – for a time, previous members successfully concealed the Shane Warne-Mark Waugh money-for-weather-forecasts scandal.

The Lehmann case demanded ICC intervention, but was it also a cry for help? A just-published poll by the Australian Cricketers' Association revealed only 25 per cent of international players respect the ICC as a governing body, and only 18 per cent think the ICC are running the game well. When Australian players were polled on those same points not one supported the ICC.

They are dangerous numbers on the eve of a World Cup that promises to test the ICC's competency severely. Players are critical of the ICC because:

1) They don't appoint the best eight international umpires to the élite panel.

2) Their umpires and match referees lack consistency.

3) The penalties they impose are inequitable.

4) They don't deal adequately with doubtful bowling actions. Muttiah Muralitharan has threatened not to come down under again because crowds persist in calling him a chucker. Justin Langer got hot under the collar with the Barmy Army earlier in the summer for "no-balling" Brett Lee.

What's this all about? Surely players can withstand a bit of razz from the outer? The old theory about the true champion being the last one left standing after a stint in a hot kitchen seems to have been superseded by every meringue-maker's motto, Thin Skins Are Winners. Some former players even thought any ban at all on Lehmann would be too tough.

Such grandstanding only chips away at the game's character. Players appreciate their character being recognised in a tough hundred but bristle when its absence is noted in a tough call. When a bat-pad catch is denied against Mark Butcher and we see Steve Waugh grubbing the ball along the turf with his boot, is he revisiting his football youth or is it a silent protest?

Langer offered us another outburst because Jason Gillespie's word wasn't taken on a catch that was eventually rejected by the third umpire. Get the message? It's trust the players, not the officials.

Yet when Steve Waugh was caught behind in Australia's crumbling second innings in the Boxing Day Test but England didn't appeal, Waugh didn't walk. Nor did Langer, after play, protest that he should have. Cricket officials are often frustratingly anaemic, but player power can be stunningly selective, and sometimes plain ugly.

In 1981, in the brave new world after World Series Cricket, the players were allowed to monitor their own behaviour. When Dennis Lillee was found guilty of kicking Javed Miandad during a Test in Perth, the team fines committee asked for some pocket-money, $200. The umpires protested and the ACB banned him for two matches.

With that in mind, and the negative impact that McEnroe's misbehaviour had on tennis for so long, we can only hope that the Australian Cricketers' Association will shortly poll their members along the following lines: can the behaviour of cricketers be improved?

Still... record crowds paid record monies this summer to watch the Australians romp in and if I don't stop whingeing I'll be accused of being un-Australian.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in