Australian cricket: divided we fall
Columnist By Kersi Meher-Homji, 5 Nov 2011 Kersi Meher-Homji is a Roar Expert
- Tagged:
- Australia, Cricket, Michael Clarke, Simon Katich
Australia's Simon Katich reacts as he walks back to the pavilion after losing his wicket. AP Photo/Aijaz Rahi
Related coverage
Are the days of Packer World Series Cricket back? Remember the dark era of late 1970s and early 1980s when most countries had an upper hand over a divided Australia? Especially the period when the Packer boys gave the establishment Test captain Kim Hughes a tough time?
I must admit that it was not just the WSC organisers who gave Kim nightmares before he retired as Australia’s captain amid tears in the 1984-85 series against the mighty West Indies under Clive Lloyd.
It was also his bad form against the Windies pace-as-fire and their brilliant array of batsmen. But was not Kim’s loss of form partly due to carping criticisms from Rod Marsh, Ian Chappell et al?
The end of the WSC-establishment feud and the astute leadership of Allan Border, Mark Taylor and Steve Waugh brought Australia back to her winning ways. More importantly, it was the unity: all for one, one for all mantra. To use a cliché: united we stand, divided we fall.
The Simon Katich – Michael Clarke altercation reminded me of the ugly period of Australian cricket. Australian teams have been united since 1986, winning the World Cups in 1987, 1999, 2003 and 2007.
Under Clarke Australia seems to be on its way up again after the loss of their legendary stars, Taylor, the Waugh twins, Shane Warne, Glenn McGrath, Matthew Hayden, Justin Langer, Stuart MacGill… in one fell swoop. But this bickering between NSW colleagues ‘Katto’ Katich and ‘Pup’ Clarke will not help Australian cricket, especially when blown up by journalists.
Now another NSW man, fast bowler Brett Lee, appears to inflame the debate further by stating in his just released autobiography My Life, “If you can’t get on with ‘Katto’, you must be an ordinary bloke.” A direct dig at skipper Clarke.
I have not read the book so cannot comment on it. His quote may have been taken out of context but I can imagine huge headlines in print and electronic media in days to come. And huge sales of Lee’s book My Life!
In the Asian subcontinent Pakistan quickie Shoaib Akhtar’s autobiography Controversially Yours (probably ghosted too) became a best-seller when he wrote that Sachin Tendulkar was shivering with fear when facing his bowling.
Same was the case when Adam Gilchrist’s autobiography True Colours became a best-seller in 2008 when he called Tendulkar a liar. Then he promptly apologised. But they were writing against an opponent. For a current cricketer to write or speak against a team mate is disappointing.
I am a Katich supporter and strongly feel that he should be in the Australian Test team as an opening batsman in South Africa. Also his batting form is adequate with a match-saving century last week in Sheffield Shield and a run-a-ball 61 against South Australia Redbacks in the Ryobi One-Day Cup yesterday. However, team unity should take precedence over personal grievances.
Now it is for Cricket Australia to diffuse this unpleasant matter by listening to both parties rather than pass judgement against one.
Recommend this story.
The Turkey 10
The Turkey 10 teams have now been selected, as Wild Turkey Bourbon's sport sponsorship kicks into the next exciting phase.
Choose which side you're going to support and get in the running to win $2,500!
Simply visit Wild Turkey Australia on Facebook for your chance to win.
Find out more.
The Crowd Says (18) | Page 1 of Comments
Have Your Say
- Explore:
- Australia, Cricket, Michael Clarke, Simon Katich
November 5th 2011 @ 9:26am
Brian said | November 5th 2011 @ 9:26am | Report comment
The problem is that Clarke appears full of himself and appears to favour certain personalties as a result. When told of Kato’s comment Clarke should have played a straight bat. Instead he made a descending comment about Kato not getting in now – illustrating exactly why so many detest him.
Ironically he will probably be a much better captain than Ponting tactics wise, despite being a lesser batsman.
November 5th 2011 @ 9:54am
Steggz said | November 5th 2011 @ 9:54am | Report comment
So it’s ok for Katich to have a go at Clarke, but not the other way round?
As for performance v personalities, you can’t have a dressing room that isn’t fully behind the skipper. In no other sport is there the level of influence that a cricket captain has. As much as Katich could and possibly should still be in the Test side, I wouldn’t want someone who obviously has major issues with Clarke.
November 6th 2011 @ 3:14pm
Timmuh said | November 6th 2011 @ 3:14pm | Report comment
Not really, but if Clarke is supposed to be the leader its up to him to defuse personality clashes like this befire they gegt out of hand. This is not likely to be the same as the Hughes/Lillee/Marsh where the WSC boys were pre-meditated about undermining Hughes from the day he was first picked to play for WA. This seems to be something that was fuelled by later incidents, and if the captain has to make the ffort to work with everyone – especially the person who is arguably the best performed player in the last few years.
Katich sure doesn’t appear to be blameless, but with higher responsibility comes higher responsibility, and that rests with Clarke as captain and selector (its just one example of why the captain should not be a selector).
November 6th 2011 @ 3:25pm
Johnno said | November 6th 2011 @ 3:25pm | Report comment
ANd who is it Timmuh who sets the dressing room culture, Clarke himself says he is nothing like the Lille/Marsh/Ian chapel era, or alan bored or steve waugh.
ANd he is also nothing like the matt hayed or andrew synods or someone klatch or glen mcgrath type personalities. Blokey blokes.
I don’t know if the term metrosexual is right, but players like Micheal Calrke ,shane watson, cameorn white, phil hughes seem nothing like the Matt Hayden or simon klatch types.
ANd this is the point who now sets the styl eof the dressing room and this confusing thing of who it is who sets what fits in and who doesn’t'/ i find it remarkable the supposed people over the years who have got criticised for supposedly not fitting into this so called iconic ro sacred dressing room (Brad Hodge, stuart mcagill, and then i laugh and think wow there is nothing in the slightest bit wrong with them and i liked them moor ethan half the so call deployers who do fit in.
ANd also just about every player seems to get knocked or critised about the dressing room personality you name it(alan border captain grumpy, warney yes warney remember warney carrying on with a stump after ashes test win dancing) so who can win in this dressing room perception for the tabloids and this mythical ftting in if warney can’t win all the time.
And maybe that is just it now simon klatch’s personality types are suddenly the minority in the aussie dressing room and men like him Justin Langer, David Boon MATT HAYDEN, these types of persoanlities are no longer welcomed into the so called australia dressing room culture.
Which is a shame as i am a big simon klatch fan and like many of the players in the past better as perosanlites than the new style personalites of micheal clarke and shane watson just my opinion
November 5th 2011 @ 10:52am
Al from ctown said | November 5th 2011 @ 10:52am | Report comment
Guess I’d rather be an ordinary bloke then even try to get along with someone who chokes ppl when they get upset.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
November 5th 2011 @ 4:58pm
sheek said | November 5th 2011 @ 4:58pm | Report comment
Al,
You obviously belong to the school of thought that believes if you say something often enough, it will somehow become fact…..
November 5th 2011 @ 1:13pm
damos_x said | November 5th 2011 @ 1:13pm | Report comment
Katich wasn’t sacked at the time of the offence against Clarke so what does this suggest ? that it happened but was condoned by the squad or it’s senior members at the the time or that it didn’t happen quite as we have been led to believe & there is possibly a bit more to the issue than we know .
Either way both men should be exactly that & get together & one can apologise & the other accept & move on form there. This whole episode shows that perhaps neither of them really deserve to be in the team, particularly Clarke who surely would be very nervous if he wasn’t the anointed one long before he was actually crowned.
As for Katich it would be a shame to see yet another proven player ( Brad Hodge anyone ?!) left out for reasons obviously nothing to do with actual cricket performance & yet I can’t help but feel that apart from the pre-requisite apology from Katich that the ball rests firmly in Clarke’s court. He is the captain & surely must put the teams best interests ahead of his own & if his leadership of the squad is so tenuous that the presence of Katich would destabilise him then perhaps he should be under greater scrutiny as captain. There is always the idea that it is not just Clarke who doesn’t want Katich & that other players would prefer his absence but we will remain in the dark on that one unless someone comes forward in support of Clarke.
At this point it seems that Australian cricket & its supporters will be the ones to suffer (although not perhaps as much as Simon Katich) as we are denied the efforts of his runs, tactical nous ( perhaps yet another reason the King doesn’t want a pretender to the throne in his castle) & experience as we seek to restore ourselves to former levels of success. As a viewer & paying member of the public I would like to see Katich playing as opening partner to Watson ( this is putting aside the moral dilemma of the assault on Clarke) & onward we march to triumph after triumph .
In fact this situation is perhaps a clear pointer to the hurdles ahead for the team as we move culturally from a team to a squad of contracted players to just a group of cricketing mercenaries a’ la the IPL. Katich throttled Clarke out of anger in response to disrespect for the team & it’s traditions yet the ground is shifting under his feet as the traditions are no longer as important or valid in a world where players turn out for several different teams of various persuasions in different forms of the game each year & not necessarily the same ones from year to year apart from the national squads.
How important is teamwork & team spirit if you fly in & fly out to tournaments around the world with a different group of people each time ?
Katich may well be the victim of more than a personal vendetta, he may be the first signpost on the road to a different world of cricket.
November 5th 2011 @ 3:00pm
ANIL VERMA said | November 5th 2011 @ 3:00pm | Report comment
Hello Kersi!
Cheers friend!
It seems CRICKET is no longer THE DULL AND GREEN but now has GORY colours.Suspected disappearances , murder , gambling , prisons and what not.Cricket it seems is going to the next level of entertainment!
Players mud slinging and infighting is too dull a topic now.
November 5th 2011 @ 8:43pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | November 5th 2011 @ 8:43pm | Report comment
Hi Anil,
November 5th 2011 @ 8:47pm
Kersi Meher-Homji said | November 5th 2011 @ 8:47pm | Report comment
Hello Anil,
Colourful comments. I’m afraid cricket is changing for the worse.
November 5th 2011 @ 5:04pm
sheek said | November 5th 2011 @ 5:04pm | Report comment
Gidday Kersi,
iIwouldn’t say things are as bad as back in the late 70s-early/80s. Almost every generation has players who spat with each other. While a team is successful, such undercurrents can be hidden, or deflected.
Bradman wasn’t liked by many of his team mates, firstly through the 30s, then again in the 40s. But while he scored virtually 100 everytime he batted, & the team kept winning, differences were kept under control.
Gilchrist & Warne didn’t see eye to eye, being entirely different personalities. But this didn’t stop them being an incredibly successful spinner-keeper combo. It is only in retirement that the sniping comes out.
But when things run bad, as they are in Australian cricket at present, these personal grievances rise to the surface.
November 5th 2011 @ 5:18pm
stabpass said | November 5th 2011 @ 5:18pm | Report comment
Bradman allegedly had big issues with catholic teammates, sectarian issues were quite a point of difference back then.
In particular Bradman had a very frosty relationship with tiger O’Reilly.
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/29/1099028214125.html?from=storylhs
Bit hard to point the finger from where i stand , as we are all products of our upbringing, environment.
As a kid who went to catholic boys school, i did not really grasp the Britishness of the game untill much later.
November 5th 2011 @ 8:02pm
BigAl said | November 5th 2011 @ 8:02pm | Report comment
Englishness please !
November 5th 2011 @ 5:07pm
jamesb said | November 5th 2011 @ 5:07pm | Report comment
I think Australian cricket has more things to worry about, like improving the standard of shield cricket, rather than worrying about a feud between katich and Clarke
November 5th 2011 @ 8:58pm
Al from ctown said | November 5th 2011 @ 8:58pm | Report comment
Sheek… Seems to be the way things work around here. Besides, nothing written on here has lead me to change my mind on the situation, nothing factual anyway.
–
Comment left via The Roar’s iPhone app. Download The Roar’s iPhone App in the App Store here.
November 7th 2011 @ 11:27am
Bayman said | November 7th 2011 @ 11:27am | Report comment
Kersi,
I suppose it depends on what we consider to be divided. Given neither Lee or Katich are currently in the team I guess it doesn’t really matter what they think, or say, in terms of the effect on team morale.
In retrospect, Katich’s recent comments following the conclusion of the Shield game may better have been left unsaid. It served no real purpose other than to inflame a situation about which most had forgotten. Given his experience with the media Katich must have realised how those comments would be presented. He never actually said “I’m out because of Clarke”. He did, however, imply that since the incident with Clarke did happen, and since Clarke is now captain, he (Katich) would be unlikely to receive a recall despite the conciliatory tone of the new Chairman, John Inverarity.
Those comments implied also that Katich’s relationship with Clarke, almost by definition, had been permanently damaged. Clarke’s initial response tended to confirm that view. He has since seemed a little more constrained on the situation.
It may be too that Katich was expressing, in a roundabout way, some displeasure at being replaced as NSW captain presumably because to retain the position, with Clarke possibly returning for the state, may have created some issues. Who knows? And frankly, who cares?
The sad truth is that someone was always going to pay for the Ashes debacle. Hussey saved himself and Katich had a long term achilles injury. The other “old man” of the team, Ponting, was the captain and was, presumably, safe. Given the team needed some regeneration it was obvious who was at greater risk – and that man was the one “older guy” who seemed most vulnerable: Katich.
Was it fair? No! Was it likely? Absolutely! Fairness, really, does not come into it. Life’s not fair and anyone who thinks it should be clearly has not experienced enough of it. Fairness is the luxury of first world countries. Only in a society where people view themselves as “entitled” do we hear words like fair being bandied about. Get over it.
I’m a Katich fan and I’m sorry he didn’t get more opportunity. If I was to be “fair” however I might say that his comment was unnecessary and not very productive. It could only damage further his own reputation and cause. What does Clarke care – he’s still in the team and captain to boot. Given he is is yet to drop a series as captain he might argue the team doesn’t really need Katich. He might even be right.
Katich may well be unlucky and he may have acted, in the “incident”, in the interest of team unity. It now seems serious bad luck that Clarke turned out to be the next captain. Murphy’s Law at work.
As for Clarke showing leadership and offering the olive branch – why? Katich is not part of the team and will not be part of the team. Clarke’s responsibility is to those who are now part of his team. If he handles that right then Katich will simply become a footnote to cricket history. Time, and teams, move on. The king is dead, long live the king.
It will, however, be interesting to watch what the NSW selectors will do if and when Clarke becomes available for the team. Perhaps for the benefit of one, or both, the new national skipper will simply be “too busy” to represent NSW. Personally, I’d love to see them batting together in a long partnership. That would be even more interesting.
November 7th 2011 @ 11:49am
jameswm said | November 7th 2011 @ 11:49am | Report comment
Bayman
I disagree that “Clarke’s responsibility is to those who are now part of his team”.
I think his responsibility is to win tests and series. If his responsibility is only to those in the team, then he certainly should not be a selector or possibly even consulted.
Clarke could win a lot of friends by offering an olive branch, but the main problem is the one who’d suffer most from a Katich recall (Hughes) seems to be Clarke’s best mate in the team.
November 7th 2011 @ 12:43pm
Bayman said | November 7th 2011 @ 12:43pm | Report comment
jameswm,
The point of my comment is that, in my opinion, Clarke has NO responsibility to or for Katich while Katich is out of the national side. The winning of matches and series is a given which I incorrectly assumed would be obvious.
As for Clarke being a selector now that he’s captain I have firm opinions. The coach and the captain should never be selectors.
Regarding the olive branch – Katich has created the problem, let Katich solve it. Somewhere in all this Katich has to assume responsibility for the media frenzy. This time Clarke was the innocent bystander.
The fact that most people tend to like Katich more than they like Clarke, myself included, is largely irrelevant to the situation. Katich knew what he was doing and he put Clarke in the difficult position of having to explain a situation about which he had no say. Clarke is not the reason Katich was not offered a contract. Clarke had said nothing to invite the Katich after-match comments.
Sure Katich is disappointed at the recent developments and most people feel for him. But in this instance his comments were unnecessary and not very productive. If it’s olive branches people want then it should be Katich swallowing a bit of pride, not Clarke. I certainly don’t blame Clarke for thinking, “You’ve made your bed, Simon, now lie in it”.