By Geoff Lawson
June 9th 2009 @ 2:18am
Twenty20 has set the cricket world alight
West Indies' Shivnarine Chanderpaul, center right, celebrates winning the match with his teammate Ramnaresh Sarwan, center left, beside Australia's Mitchell Johnson, left, during the Group C Twenty20 World Cup cricket match between Australia and the West Indies at The Oval cricket ground in London, Saturday June 6, 2009. AP Photo/Matt Dunham
It’s cold here in England and occasionally windy as well. Perfect weather for cricket. The Poms love wearing an anorak to Lords or The Oval, a thermos of tea and a cheese sandwich tucked under the arm on the Bakerloo Line or Northern Line.
When they arrive at the grounds, they can buy a plastic bucket of beer to see them through the action.
The World Twenty20 Cup is up and running under dripping skies and temperatures in the teens. Somehow, after the first three days, all fixtures have managed to be completed, albeit the Scotland Vs New Zealand game being a total of 13 overs.
Despite the crush on the tube and the multiple layers of clothing, the shortest form of the game has set alight the generous crowds.
The sixes and fours from reverse sweeps and ‘ramp’ shots over the ‘keeper have people buzzing. They like this fluffy improvised stuff, a lot.
Perhaps, like the rest of the world, we have had enough soccer to last several lifetimes (England four Kazakhstan-nil on Saturday, if you missed the score from Almaty).
England’s shock, horror, “we are England and deserve to beat the guys across the Channel who play in clogs,” was appropriately played on the anniversary of D Day, but more closely evoked memories of Dunkirk.
England soon put the unthinkable in the past tense by thrashing a Pakistan team who have returned to the bad old days of inappropriate selections, dreadful fielding, and eclectic leadership.
Pakistan now have to beat the mighty Netherlands by more than 50 runs to avoid the elimination that pursued England.
Meanwhile, the Australians, unsettled by further alcohol fueled antics by the man with more comebacks than Dame Nellie, also need to win against a fairly handy Sri Lankan team on Monday evening in Nottingham to escape the ignobility of a two week training camp in Leicestershire while the nearest they get to the winner’s presentation is the TV set in their hotel rooms.
And all this in the first 72 hours!
Chris Gayle must have mistaken Brett Lee’s bowling for the first tee at St Andrews as he hit the Lazarus bowler over the five story high Bedser Stand, a couple of bounces on the slate into the surrounding streets.
Lee bowled all four of his allocated overs, a poor piece of captaincy in itself (or are the Australians still not treating a twenty over World Tournament as a fitness trial for the July 8 Test match?), going for 56 runs.
Mike Hussey didn’t get his hands on a high catch for the second time and wafted luckily with the blade. He continues to look like a man past his best.
Brad Hodge must be dizzy from shaking his head in disbelief.
Whether Australia make it past Sri Lanka and into the second round may be a moot point as the selectors must already be reconsidering their decision to select an under-done, out-of-form, aging bowler lacking any type of meaningful cricket since Christmas in the Ashes squad.
It makes a mockery of Doug Bollinger’s outstanding domestic form and palatable but limited international experience.
Slow bowling is proving its worth already in the Twenty20 and Australia select none.
The English media and fans lapped up the Australian loss as if gifted from the cricket gods. If their own team could lose to the Dutch, then it was good medicine for the locals when the Aussies to lose to anybody.
Ponting may not have his boys thinking or uttering the magic “Ashes” phrase, but any stumble by the men from down under is highlighted and magnified, often with the distortion that only the English tabloids can utter.
Ricky Ponting was not expecting to be under pressure this early in the northern sojourn. That may have come late in July and early August if a Test or two were lost.
The Twenty20 may be fun for some, but just ask the teams that lose if they feel like smiling.
By Monday, 8:30 pm local time, a new scenario will develop when the result of the Sri Lankan clash is known. The forecast is for more rain and no rise in the mercury.
If the game gets rained out, Australia are out of the Cup and into Leicester. But then, it never rains when you want it to.
Get Australia's best Cricket opinion emailed daily.
Like this content? Buzz it up!
Free Email updates:
Our daily emails are only sent if there is content for the sport or that author. You can subscribe to multiple daily emails; or get the daily Roar email with all our content in it. We value privacy. More...
(36)
Steffy said | June 9th 2009 @ 6:41am | Report comment
oops
Robbos said | June 9th 2009 @ 7:24am | Report comment
When does the WC start?
Spiro Zavos said | June 9th 2009 @ 9:08am | Report comment
I take it from this that Geoff Lawson is unimpressed with the selectors and with the captaincy. From what happened against Sri Lanka he seems to have been pretty prescient. Surely this Ashes series will be the last for Hilditch and co selecting teams that don’t have a shape to them and failing to reward players who get results.
Brian said | June 9th 2009 @ 10:03am | Report comment
I agree Lee was over-bowled but given his lower order batting and good fielding he’s essentially a good T20 player. The bowlers were twice asked to defend sub-standard scores and couldn’t do so. Bracken’s pace variation bowling is much more suited to the sub-continent and without a genuine spinner there wasn’t enough of an ability to take the pace off the ball for quality players good against pace (Gayle, Sangakarra). The games were lost in the batsman inability to play slow bowling. T20 is so short you have to play your best batsman up front, how it is that Clarke (who with Symonds is the best slogger of spin bowlers) now opens in ODI but not T20 is perplexing. In fact how any batsman can be a middle-order Test & T20 player yet opener in ODI is beyond me? Also where is P Hughes? Being so short there is also no need to play 6 Batsman in T20 as guys like Lee, Johnson & Hopes can come in just as well as Haddin & Hussey to slog for 2 Overs. Rather than 6 Batsman a T20 team is really your best 4 batsman, 5 bowlers and 2 extras who are a good fielders and may come in handy. XI should have been more like – Hughes, Clarke, Ponting, Hodge, Haddin, Watson, Lee, Johnson, Hauritz, Bracken, Siddle. I guess like all new things the Aussies will get there in time.
Choppy said | June 9th 2009 @ 11:40am | Report comment
20-20 isn’t cricket. It just goes to show, the shorter the game, the odds of teams with less skills increases.
Let me ask this question:
If Australia played 10 tests against the Windies how many would they win? 8-10?
If Australia played 10 ODI’s against the Windies how many would they win? 6-8?
If Australia played 10 20-20’s against the Windies how many would they win? 5?
Bring on the ashes I say….
Sam said | June 9th 2009 @ 12:02pm | Report comment
Choppy that is ridiculous. Basically you are suggesting that because Australia has less chance of defeating a team in a format that they clearly have no idea how to play, the whole concept of T20 is rubbish?
Yes T20 requires a bit of luck and a lot of momentum, but has other sides in this tournament have demonstratedsport , effective use of slow bowling and having flexibility in the batting/bowling line ups is key. The Windies demonstrated this with great variations of pace from Edwards and Taylor, whilst the Sri Lankan spinners were top notch last night.
Get a grip mate and realise that this Australian team is really not that flash in the T20/ODI version of the game, and too young to be proven in the test match format as yet. Here’s hoping you get towelled up by England, then maybe you can pretend Test cricket in England isn’t that important, only the ones played in Australia really count right?
WA said | June 9th 2009 @ 12:21pm | Report comment
Bring on the tests. Even if Australia were winning T20s it is inconsequential. No one who plays test cricket should even be selected for this bastardised version of the game. Give it to the kids.
LeftArmSpinner said | June 9th 2009 @ 12:32pm | Report comment
Henry, from those days as the scribe/editor and probably printer of the UNSW cricket club newsletter, your journalistic skills have sure developed in the right direction.
Great article.
I can only agree with your assessment and history has since proven you correct with the Aussie defeat by Sri Lanka.
I haven’t watched either the IPL or the current tournament, but my son and I watched a replay of Warnies team winning a thriller in the IPL. Having been cruising defending 40+ runs from 21 balls, then giving away two overs costing 13 each, then picking up a few wickets to slow the chase, it was nothing if not exciting. It struck me that it is much faster and more exciting than baseball.
I really like the idea of the Netherlands, Ireland and scotland making some headway.
Packing Lords or the Oval is great but not much of an achievement given they seat only about 20K. But, it is good that the Poms have embraced 20/20. Now we need them to take the same attitude to the ELV’s. The principle is the same!!!! Entertainment!!!!
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | June 9th 2009 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
Australia has not got to grips with T20 and we certainly didn’t deserve to do well….frankly I don’t care if we don’t, it is great as a bit of entertainment….but a world cup…please!! Leave it for the IPL.
Benjamin Conkey said | June 9th 2009 @ 12:47pm | Report comment
WA you just gave me an idea. Have a ‘Twenty20 Little League’, similar to the baseball version which is screened on ESPN!
Brian said | June 9th 2009 @ 1:20pm | Report comment
Choppy, are u serious? If Soderling played Nadal over 5 days and best of 29 sets would he win? Obviously less time in any sport helps the less skilled team. In the case of T20 it also helps the team more reliant on a few talented individuals rather than those with an academy system to produce a production line of methodical batsman and fast bowlers. AT20 contest is 3 hours and has clearly been long enough for Australia to lose their last 5 games
Choppy said | June 9th 2009 @ 1:38pm | Report comment
Sam, I am not a fan of 20-20 at all, I don’t think it takes the same levels of skill as the longer forms of the game.
20-20 is so short that one quick fire 50 or 3 wickets changes the momentum so drastically that it is almost impossible to change. Over 50 overs a team can be 2-20 and still end up with a good score, in a test there is even more opportunity to change the momentum and that’s where the skills I appreciate are more on display.
I never said that Australia deserved to win against the WI or SL in fact having watched the WI game and the highlights of the SL game it’s clear that they have not picked the right team or implemented the right tactics in 20-20.
Brian that isn’t the best analogy, I do find it interesting that you actually agree with me in the next sentence ‘Obviously less time in any sport helps the less skilled team.’ which is my exact point.
Choppy said | June 9th 2009 @ 1:41pm | Report comment
Sam, I am not a fan of 20-20 at all, I don’t think it takes the same levels of skill as the longer forms of the game.
20-20 is so short that one quick fire 50 or 3 wickets changes the momentum so drastically that it is almost impossible to change. Over 50 overs a team can be 2-20 and still end up with a good score, in a test there is even more opportunity to change the momentum and that’s where the skills I appreciate are more on display.
I never said that Australia deserved to win against the WI or SL in fact having watched the WI game and the highlights of the SL game it’s clear that they have not picked the right team or implemented the right tactics in 20-20.
Brian the Soderling/Nadal isn’t the best analogy, If you’d said that instead of 5 sets they were playing 5 tie breakers then I would agree that would be tennis’s equivalent to 20-20 cricket. I didn’t say they would win, I did suggest the ratio is much better in shorter games.
I do find it interesting that you actually agree with me in the next sentence ‘Obviously less time in any sport helps the less skilled team.’ which is my exact point.
Sam said | June 9th 2009 @ 1:47pm | Report comment
Whether you like it or not Choppy, it is here to stay. It simply is a condenced version of the 50 over game. Its stupid to say that a team that has not had a good start to the innings cannot still build a match winning lead.
In India’s game against Bangladesh the other night when Dhoni and Gahmbir were at the crease they were barely going at 6 an over. Yuvraj came to the crease and blasted 41 off 18 and put them in match winning position. Here is a prime example of the batting team wrestling back the advantage from the bowling team. Obviously the skill set is different to the likes of test match cricket, but who cares? Skills are skills, whether that be blocking out the last day of a test match, firing a quick 50 in the last 10 overs of an ODI or athletic and sublime fielding in T20. They all encompass what the game is about.
Added to this, T20 is the best way for emerging nations like Ireland, Scotland and Netherlands to find their feet in International cricket. If T20 is the catalyst to bring about change, growth and development of world cricket, then who is going to argue?
Choppy said | June 9th 2009 @ 1:56pm | Report comment
I did not say impossible I said ‘almost impossible’ ‘Yuvraj came to the crease and blasted 41 off 18 and put them in match winning position.’ This is my exact point, 18 balls changed the whole game.
Unfortunately I agree with you that it is here to stay and no-one apart from maybe England and Australia really care that 20-20 will probably be ‘cricket’ in 20 or so years time because it will have smothered the other forms of the game.
When you say ‘Obviously the skill set is different to the likes of test match cricket, but who cares?’
I do for one, I acknowledge that I’m in the minority but I’m still entitled to an opinion.
Benjamin Conkey said | June 9th 2009 @ 2:09pm | Report comment
I’m with you Choppy..but I will say this. Not everyone can blast sixes at will, just like not everyone can defend for a sustained period, on a green wicket in a Test Match. Twenty20 does have its own skill level, even if I don’t appreciate it as much.
What is going to most interest me is those players that can perform in all three forms of the game.
Ian Chappel said it a while ago…that if you’re a good player..it doesn’t matter what format you play, you’re skills will shine through.
You might get lucky in a Twenty20 match with loads of wickets, or a quick fire 50 with edges etc..but I guess the point remains..that career statistics will prove who does have genuine cricket skills.
Sam said | June 9th 2009 @ 2:45pm | Report comment
Lets bust this myth that you cannot play all 3 forms of the game and be successful in all. Many players are able to make the transition despite the heavy workloads, unlike the Aussies.
Kumar Sangakkara – Test Average 55, ODI 36, T20 27
Gautam Gambhir – Test Average: 54, ODI 38, T20 31
Kevin Pietersen – Test Average 50, ODI 46, T20 28
Contrast this to the Aussies
M Clarke, Test Average 47, ODi, 42, T20 17
M Hussey Test Average: 55, ODI 54, T20 25
Even D Hussey, reknowned as a T20 specalist only has an average of 29 and a ODI average of 24.
So if the rest of the world are succesfully able to take their ’skills’ and modify and adapt them to the T20 version of the game, then why not Australia? Excuses, excuses.
Benjamin Conkey said | June 9th 2009 @ 2:56pm | Report comment
Sam, ironically Andrew Symonds has the best record for Australia in T20s..averaging 48..and his career strike rate of 170 will be hard to match.
If he never plays again, he may be Australia’s Bradman of Twenty20s!
Brian said | June 9th 2009 @ 3:42pm | Report comment
Choppy I understand your point but gripping sport has a lot to do with the contest. An Australia v Zimbabwe Test is not interesting because Zimbabwe has no chance. A T20 maybe. Every sport needs a balance between the better team winning and the contest. I do understand the uniquness and intrigue of Test Cricket, what I don’t like is that because Australia is out of the T20 World Cup that form of the game is regarded as inconsequential. This despite TV ratings and crowds saying otherwise. Rather than fight T20 wouldn’t it be better to embrace it and acknowledge that ODI has gone past its use by date. As you say just my opinion but I would turf the ODI and have just T20 and Test matches.
Robbos said | June 9th 2009 @ 3:46pm | Report comment
Sam, Test cricket I follow & haven’t missed a Test in 15 years in Sydney.
T20 may be the future, but it’s not for me.
ilikedahoodoogurusingha said | June 9th 2009 @ 3:50pm | Report comment
“So if the rest of the world are succesfully able to take their ’skills’ and modify and adapt them to the T20 version of the game, then why not Australia? Excuses, excuses.”
Sam…I am sure there are many members of the Australian cricketing fraternity who can adapt their skills to the T20 format….I just get the impression that many of them don’t really want to….its a bit of hit and giggle, designed to entertain the tv audience on the sub continent….did you notice the ground advertisers…mostly Indian firms (Hero Honda, Ultratech Cement etc). I have no problem with T20, but we have the IPL, why bother with a Mickey Mouse World Cup every 2 years. Players complain about how much cricket they have to play, then they get another tournament thrown at them. I for one wouldn’t even be bothered if the Australians had won.
Brett McKay said | June 9th 2009 @ 3:52pm | Report comment
Brian, all valid thoughts about the attraction of the contest. I happened to be in a shopping centre on Saturday morning, and walked past a Foxtel kiosk which happened to have the replay of the England-Netherlands game on four screens. Not having seen the result, I checked the score and saw that the Dutch needed 5 off 4 to win, and so stopped to see it out. By the time the last ball was bowled (about 10 minutes later!!), there must have been 50 people standing around watching the end. Mild cheers went up when the Netherlands went up, and the crowd quickly dispersed, which must have cruelled the Foxtel guy.
The point being that a tight contest attracts punters. Now, I’ll be interested to see if Ch9 still show the remaining stages of the T20WC now that Australia is out, becuase it would be pretty poor form if they don’t, but it would also be indicative of the fickle nature of Australian sport followers. Likewise, let’s see how much press coverage the tournament gets here for the next 10 days..
Sam said | June 9th 2009 @ 4:41pm | Report comment
ilikedahoodoogurusingha (quality name that, took me a while to figure it out though)
Obviously the Australian players are more than capable of adapting their skills to suit the format, they just A) Don’t know how to and B) Don’t want to. The latter smacks of the arrogance that has surrounded the side for almost 15 years. I say let them, if they don’t want to keep pace and continue this self righteous and ‘bigger than the game’ approach then that’s fine with me. If they are not careful however, the game could go past them in all formats, starting with T20.
Yes T20 is the future and is very marketable to the sub continent crowds, however the game was invented in England and is extremely popular there as well as the West Indies. The team that was picked was wrong, in fact Australia’s best T20 players are all retired ones, Hayden, Gilchrist and Warne! Coming into the tournament Ponting was quoted as saying
“With the amount of big tournaments we have coming up it was about making sure we were in the best shape,” by The Independent.
He was also referencing to the fact that himself, Clarke and M Hussey didn’t play IPL to make sure they were ready for these ‘big tournaments’. Now all of a sudden as they are dumped out of it, its not a big deal. Have a cry Punter.
drewster said | June 9th 2009 @ 5:00pm | Report comment
I think Brians first post is spot on! Why would you need so many specialists in a side. The game is made for all rounders (batting and bowling) and with the way one over can change the outcome you would think the more options with bat and ball the better.
Colin N said | June 9th 2009 @ 9:14pm | Report comment
“Packing Lords or the Oval is great but not much of an achievement given they seat only about 20K. But, it is good that the Poms have embraced 20/20.”
We invented the bloody thing, and like most other sports we invented, we’re pretty crap at it.
Jameswm said | June 10th 2009 @ 9:21am | Report comment
Sam – why do you hate the Aussie cricketers so muchand Ponting specifically? Is it the years of them spanking whatever team it is you support (presumably England)? Or is it the supposed arrogance that comes with winning?
The selectors made some poor choices I think, and this means they’re arrogant? No, it means they’re stupid, which they’ve also proven with test selections over the last 2 years.
Brian if you are suggesting MClarke should open in the T20s you obviously haven’t been watching much of his batting lately.
And as someone else said – whether we won or lost the T20, it would have made no difference come Ashes time.
Sam said | June 10th 2009 @ 9:47am | Report comment
Wake up and smell the roses Jameswm. If you get your head out of Australian media, you will see that pretty much everyone else around the world hates the Aussie cricket team (even some within the country I may add). No one is wondering whether the arrogance is supposed, it is definite, a combination of Ponting’s ego, selectors having their favourites which has seen some influential and arrogant players stick around for much too long (Hayden and Symonds) and complete lack of respect for the entire concept of T20.
Call it a hit and giggle all you want, hang on to the fact that Test cricket is the traditionalist form of the game by all means, but don’t go whinging and whining when T20 and the IPL eventually take over ODI’s are abolished and Test cricket is put on the backburner.
Jameswm said | June 10th 2009 @ 1:23pm | Report comment
So you’re angry at me too, even if you haven’t read much of what I’ve said.
I’m not going to get into a pointless argument with an angry man. Take the time to look at other threads and see what I’ve said about how the Aussies approached the T20 WC. Don’t suppose an attitude from me without taking the time to read up. Go and find where I called T20 cricket hit and giggle. Go and find where I put it down. It’s much easier to assume that every Aussie thinks the same way and hate them all, I guess.
I’ve experienced Pommies hating the Aussies in cricket, especially in an English pub once in Paris in 2009. They all admitted there were no grounds for it, and they especially hated Warnie. They conceded it was mainly from copping hidings for so long.
Katich, Clarke, Lee, Clark, Hughes, MHussey, Johnson, Hauritz, Hilfenhaus, Siddle – these are all delightful blokes and you’d struggle to say a harsh word about any of them. All teams have their idiots (and you’d be close to the first nominee for the title from the Roar’s readers’ team), but most in the Aussie team are quality individuals. I assume tirades like yours are water off a duck’s back to them, because you don’t know them. You can go to one of the tests and scream your lungs out at them if it makes you feel any better. Warn us in advance so we can watch you on TV.
What do you expect Ponting to say? “We’re in crisis mode”? “The Ashes are gone”? They take test cricket more seriously than T20 cricket and you sure won’t find me criticising them for that.
Sam said | June 10th 2009 @ 1:43pm | Report comment
Goodness gracious me you are an angry individual aren’t you James? And you were calling me angry?
First of all dont go and presume that I am a Pom. Im actually Indian and I don’t recall any time in recent history where we have been flogged by your side. All the contests have been relativley close and hard fought. My dislike of the team and particuarly Ponting stems from a long time back, he is tactically usless, completley arrogant, and has no regard for anyone but himself. I gather that you know all these Australian cricketers individually, therefore calling them ‘delightful blokes’. Who are you Bruce McAveney in disguise?
This new breed of cricketers are much more tolerable then the older guard of Healy, Hayden. Warne, McGrath (who is genuienly a nice bloke off the field) and Symonds, but thats because they have nothing to be arrogant about! They havent won anything of note and I’m doubtful they will win this Ashes. I never said that you yourself call T20 a Hit and Giggle, but this is the kind of mentality many people have surronding it, it was used as a descriptive expression, no need to get all agro about it.
Go find those blokes who give out ‘free hugs’, it seems you need one you angry little ant. Do some research before you come out swinging.
Sam said | June 10th 2009 @ 2:33pm | Report comment
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,25613042-2882,00.html
Have a read in case you think my opinion is in the minority.
Virgil said | June 10th 2009 @ 3:15pm | Report comment
What I would have given to see Simon Soddy O’Donnell, Dean Jones and Viv Richards playing 20/20. What a sight that would’ve been.
Jameswm said | June 10th 2009 @ 5:22pm | Report comment
I read the article – it looks like you’ve found a kindred spirit.
You’ve now conceded that you wrongly generalised my views and I won’t argue with you on who’s angrier. Our fellow readers can work that one out for themselves. In this thread alone you’ve said, to Aussies generally or specific people: “Get a grip mate”, “Have a cry Punter”, “Here’s hoping you get towelled up by England” and, my favourite especially coming from an Indian to an Aussie, “self righteous and ‘bigger than the game’ approach”. Did someone say monkeygate? All I can say is you’ve taken your writing style from the Gordon Ramsay school of diplomacy.
I won’t take any of your criticism of Ponting seriously until I hear your views on Harbhajan.
I’m just shaking my head at the amount of vitriol than can come from one person, against a team and person that they’ve never met. “Completley arrogant, and has no regard for anyone but himself” is how you described Ponting, yet I assume you’ve never met him.
By the way if you say to someone “Call it a hit and giggle all you want”, it does sound like an accusation. And one would be justified in finding it odd to be accused of such when one hadn’t called it hit and giggle at all.
It looks like you’ve been waiting for this chance to give it to the Aussies, but I can tell you most Aussies, even (or especially) the real cricket fans, don’t care that much. If that puts us in the dark ages, so be it. It is of course logical for an Indian to love T20 cricket, when it’s the only form they’re world champs in and they have the biggest comp in the world.
Justin said | June 10th 2009 @ 6:04pm | Report comment
Did someone mention Harbhajan? Nice fella from what I have seen, angel almost
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X3Ms37yt3lg
Sam said | June 10th 2009 @ 10:00pm | Report comment
A quick reminder as to who won the last test series between our countries my friend? And the last ODI series contested between us? And the T20 World Champs? Thank you. Now moving right along.
Now on to Harbhajan. He is a moron, in the same manner that Ponting is I feel. He plays the game hard, not very fair and with a lack of respect for the game and his opponents.. Difference is he is not the captain of a nation, and usually does not make outlandish comments in the media. He’s smart enough to steer away from that.
Take for example Ponting’s press conference at the announcement of the Ashes squad, a Channel 10 reporter asked him, should England be worried about this squad? Pontings flat response was ‘ I don’t see why not’. What the hell? Ponting couldnt spell humility if it smacked him in the face. His squad is definetly not threatning when compared to the squads that have toured England in recent years, Graham Manou and Andrew McDonald? Your having a laugh. Siddle has a heart of a lion, but he reminds me of a slightly better version of Andy Bichel (thats not a compliment)
All im asking for from Ponting is a slightest bit of humilty, some respect for the game and his opponents, and some better on field body language. He is the captain of one the best teams in the world, yet his behaviour lets him down time and time again. Harbhajan’s behaviour is more to do with the fact that he simply a moron. Ponting should realise his position, respect it and look to great captains of the past such as the Chappel’s (Ian), Taylor and Waugh (Steven) on how to play the game in the right spirit.
Consider this, how many friends will Ponting have after he finishes playing that are from other countries? I reckon you could count it on one hand. I hope thats logical enough for you James (Sutherland?)
Jameswm said | June 12th 2009 @ 1:58pm | Report comment
By the way Sam – you mightn’t have seen it but I’ve said in varous threads I think Katich should be our test captain. I do think you’re being harsh on Ponting in some respects, but I agree about his lack of flair and creativity. I don’t see the arrogance the way you do (yes the green and gold glasses might have something to so with it, but then most favour their home players) and whilst I agree he over-protects his players, a degree of loyalty is to be praised. And again – how do you expect him to reply when someone asks “Do you think England should be worried about this squad?”. Should he say “Probably not, it’s pretty ordinary”?
Steve Waugh is an interesting case though. He was apparently one of the fiercest sledgers on the field, yet he was also the first to uphold the traditions of the game off it.
And I think you’ve underrated Siddle. He is faster than Bichel and bowls less pies.
James Sutherland?
Sam said | June 12th 2009 @ 4:38pm | Report comment
Katich is a good hardened crickter no doubt, but once again the case of arrogance and small mindedness is there, as evidenced in this clip
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uORaBiGmDx4
Fair enough Watson/Katich and Gambhir all give as good as they get in this clip, but have a look at the scoreboard. Wouldn’t a better idea be for the two Aussie boys to shut up and say just worry about where your going to land the next one.
Back to Ponting and this defence of players, it is very noble and part of the Australian pysche ’sticking by your mates’ blah blah. But when one of these mates is a glorified player with an alcohol abuse problem then this defence has to be questioned. Does Ponting like Symo for who he is and does he have his wellbeing at stake? Or does he just want to win at all costs, which would require a fit and firing Symonds?
In reference to the Channel 10 reporter and the question, I was just using that as an example as to how arrogant or ‘unhumble’ (not a word I know but I cant think of anything else, its Friday avo) a man could be. The media manager at CA must be paid a fortune, yet he cant even train Ponting on answering a simple question like that. Steve Waugh would have given a far more cultured response, something along the lnes of , ‘Yeh I think we have a strong squad, a good mix of young guys and experienced guys, were hoping for a really competitive series’. Simple. If your good then you dont need to go around telling everyone how good you are, people will do it for you.
Siddle is pie. Hopefully that comes through in the Ashes. Mitch Johnson is a star and will end up being a better more complete bowler then Brett Lee ever was/will be.
I was implying that because you knew so much about the Aussie side that you could in fact be James Sutherland?