Every morning for the last three days I passed two statues and did not give them even a cursory glance. This morning I was early and the MCG precinct was deserted. I was drawn, inexorably, to the first of the statues and gazed at the figure of Dennis Keith Lillee.
Captured in his delivery stride, coiled, lithe, taut and eyes focussed over his left shoulder, I could feel he was honing in on his quarry.
Twenty yards further and Victoria’s favourite son, “Billy” Ponsford is immortalised in a magnificent sculpture. It captures the determination of the man who went in first. The man who took the first barrage from the opposition.
The editors of Wisden remarked on the 1930 tour of England: “it is only fair to say that on more than one occasion [Bradman’s] task was rendered the easier by the skilful manner in which Woodfull and Ponsford, by batting of different description, had taken the sting out of the England bowling.”
It was with a heavy heart that I entered the MCG and felt as if I was in the vault of an Egyptian Pyramid. There was a foreboding sense of personal loss as I turned on the lights in the empty press box. I looked on to the vast expanse of green and the groundsmen cleaning, spraying and preening the old lady for what was going to be something like the last rites.
The situation facing Australia’s remaining four batsmen was something akin to prisoners on death row. The hanging was inevitable and it was only a matter time.
Johnson’s wait was mercilessly short; he inside-edged a Tremlett ball on to his pads and it ricocheted into his stumps.
One would say cricket’s version of euthanasia.
Haddin is the best straight driver in Australian cricket and I feel he would thrive with the added responsibility of captaining and batting one rung higher up the order. He is also a straight shooter and will be playing all three forms of the game.
There is a precedent for Haddin in that Dhoni is managing his tenure very successfully.
Siddle must, also, have passed the Ponsford statue because he was showing great resolve in partnering his, maybe, future Test captain.
Haddin waited 54 minutes before he opened his shoulders and deposited Swann high and handsome over long on.
Haddin brought up his 50 with a judicious edge and his innings had been a mixture of studied defence and calculated bravado.
Siddle made a robust 40 and showed he can be a doughty cricketer when he applies himself.
After Siddle went Hilfenhaus did not last long and Harris had a no-show. I would have expected him to come out even with a plaster. If for nothing else than to delay the inevitable.
Haddin remained unbeaten and literally the last man standing. He fought a lone battle and deserves to be considered as Australia’s next captain.
Ponting was interviewed on ABC Radio and said “You have to give full credit to England for the way they have prepared.”
He also said “I still feel I have a lot to offer Australian cricket.” This seemed at odds with his statement that he would know “this afternoon” about his damaged finger and his future.
Ponting’s personal struggles with the captaincy and his own form are now affecting ALL of Australian cricket. Perhaps he needs an extended break and Sydney would be a good starting point.
There is no shame in sitting out the next Test. There will be a reluctance to push him when he is at the lowest point of his career.
Some of the hardest decisions in life have the attendance of sadness. But that should not be a reason to maintain the status quo.
Ponting will be stubborn to the bitter end and does not believe he is at the end of the road. And in the final analysis it should be up to the selectors to determine this.
On the evidence of the last 18 months it does seem that Ponting is not the destructive number 3 he was three summers ago.
Perhaps he is a ghost from summers past!
Bayman
Guest
Sorry, Bob, I didn't fully realize, in time, that you were a martyr to junior cricket. Giving up your time, neglecting the family and producing the next generation of Test cricketers. That was my mistake and I apologize. Now let me just say it one more time for the inattentive. I would actually encourage young players to emulate Bradman's style. Spend twenty or thirty minutes playing in the "V", evaluate the conditions and the pitch/bounce/sideways movement and when you feel you've got it understood.......by all means play across the line. Bradman, of course, still managed to move his feet - unlike Smith who just stood up and went bang. Bradman, curiously hit these balls where he intended. Smith, on the other hand, bottom edged it into his stumps. Still, I'm sure old Don was pleased that nobody was following his advice. Bradman may have lacked the style of Jackson, or Greg Chappell, or Mark Waugh but strangely, he was more successful. Perhaps because he knew the business of batting and he knew his job. On the evidence so far, the current squad have very little idea of Test match requirements and very little inclination to find out. Perhaps that's why England have managed three scores over 500 and we've managed one - on the back of a significant contribution of 300 plus from Hussey and Haddin. Every other Australian innings has resembled a procession. Still, as long as your club is running coaching classes we can all rest assured that what we are seeing on the Test arena is a moment's abberation, soon to be resolved. Personally, I'm comfortable with the fact that none of your coaches have seen fit to discuss Bradman's technique and it's possible advantages in the modern day. Of course, being primarily a back foot player none of your coaches would probably have a clue about Bradman's technique. As an aside, Bob, did you notice how many Aussie batsmen got burnt plunging onto the front foot in Melbourne. Still, I shouldn't criticize, it is after all the modern way to play. Which maybe, perhaps, is why our top six, Hussey aside, is averaging 20-30 and their top six is averaging a little bit more. But let's face it, WTF would Bradman know about modern day batting? Bob, just let me add that I guenuinely don't give a toss about the fact your club runs coaching clinics if your coaches are incompetent. More hindrance than help. Being well-meaning doesn't count for much if you don't know what you're doing. Most of Australia's legends were, essentially self-taught and un-coached. There's a lesson there somewhere. Modern coaching is as much self-promotion as it is unnecessary. Please spare me from fellows who never played the game but now have a coaching qualification. As JC might have once said, "Forgive them Father, for they know not what they do!"
Lolly
Guest
Parents are a tough one. My grandparents came to watch us play hockey week in, week out and they were great, calm and encouraging, but some of the other kids were stuck with parents who came regularly but would be making absolute morons of themselves on the sidelines. Even as a kid, I was shocked at the lack of parental etiquette and near bullying of the coaches. I admire greatly coaches who do it for the love of it. I never had a coach that was paid. No kid would play anything if people didn't volunteer to coach them.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Bayman,Bob,I have coached juniors from under 10 thru to under 16 and all they want is direction that is authoritative. Not authoritarian. If CA can understand this subtle difference it will be a start.
Bob
Guest
Well actually Bradman did hit accross the line a lot- would not recommend anyone try to emulate his style. IMO the strength of Australian cricket has always been the clubs- local, sub-district and district. They have large numbers of junior players who they literally recruit at under 7's then train and encourage them so hopefully one day they could play in the senior team. This structure has huge advantages a it gives juniors a clear pathway and an appreciation of what they have to do to get to the next level. The senior players in the club come to the junior training nights, and out trophies and give advice to the coaches and parents. Each club is run by a small number of stalwarts, ex-players and parents who organise parents to attend coaching courses- so that hopefully there will be enough level 1 and 2 coaches to bring the kids to senior standard. It is not in the interest of any cricket club to have youngsters coming through U16's and above with poor technique. If a player has deficiencies that limit his ability to succeed in senior cricket they simply do not make it past the club 2nds or 3rds. The clubs do not want to waste their time and resources on developing sloggers or pie-chuckers. All this is done on a shoestring budget by people who have full time jobs- not everyone out there is self-interested.
Bayman
Guest
Bob, I take your point about parents and that's one aspect of junior sport which will never change. However, I also know of several "rep" teams selected from various junior comps where players are not being selected on anything other than local bias - perhaps to satisfy "squeaky wheel" parents - or club alliances....who really knows. Your comment does, in fact, raise a significant issue in junior cricket. That is, who is prepared to be involved, every day, every week, and still cop rubbish from Mister Smith who thinks young Johnnie is the next Greg Chappell. I take my hat off to the "school parent" who is prepared to help because no-one else will. Junior club cricket may well be the same - actually, it's exactly the same - but the problem is that the wrong skill set is being recognised, largely because today's result is more important than five years from now. Make no mistake, Bob, the game is under serious threat from "competitions". Winning things. In modern society we value results more than process. Consequently, our Test team is virtually devoid of technique and the reason is, apparently, the "game has changed". Sorry???? At last glance each team still had eleven players. Some were batsmen (not "batters", Michael Clarke), some were bowlers and one was a wicketkeeper. So far, nothing's different. What is different is what passes as technique these days. Just today, I had a conversation with a former Test player who happened to say that, in the recent Test series, England had bowled to Test match standard and batted to Test match standard. Australia had not. We now marvel at Anderson's ability to swing the ball at will and forget that Davidson could do that, Hawke could do that, Walker could do that, Fleming could do that. Unfortunately, none of our current team can do that. And the reason is.....why? Cook, Trott, Pietersen, Bell, even Strauss, can bat for hours and don't try to smack balls on a whim. So far, only Hussey has managed to do that and guess what, he's our leading run-scorer. The rest play like it's an ODI or a T20 match with the appropriate results. So yes, while I'm harsh it is for a reason. The players are making the mistakes but it's Cricket Australia which has set them up to fail. Too many meaningless ODIs and too many meaningless tours taking days rather than weeks and largely unnecessary. As for Steve Smith, I was, and am, a fan. The problem is that exposure to Test cricket has shown that he's nowhere near ready to hold down the number six slot. I actually don't give a toss that he's young and inexperienced. I firmly believe if you're good enough, you're old enough. Smith is about 22. Harvey, Walters, Greg Chappell et al had made Test hundreds by then. So it's not age, it's technique - and discipline. And Smith lacks it. Is that Smith's faullt or is he a victim of CA's schedule and programme of domestic cricket which allows Test players to avoid Shield cricket like the plague. In truth, a bit of both but CA's contribution to Australia's current cricketing woes should not be under-estimated. They are accountants and clerks but not cricket people. They worry about dollars, they hope playing standards will improve. So, Bob, I take your comments on board and accept that parents play a role and should be told, frankly, to take a hike. The coaches, however, are inadequately skilled, in most instances, to teach young players how to play the game. It's not their fault entirely, however, most senior coaches have been brought up on the "get on the front foot" mantra. Meanwhile, poor old Don Bradman - remember him - is spinning in his grave because back foot play has been forgotten and nobody today can remember why it was important. Mind you, I'm no expert but friends tell me Bradman could bat a bit. Suddenly, modern coaches are saying, "Bradman was wrong!" Maybe, but I don't think so!
Bob
Guest
Bayman, My club is desperately short of coaches and let face it- who wants to put up with grumpy parents all the time because their guy, who is the next Ricky Ponting, is not getting due recognition or opening the batting every week. Its a lot of work- not to mention emails and people management involved in sporting clubs. The kids just want to hang out with their mates. In my experience its the parents who adopt the winner takes all mentality not the coaches. I think you are being a little harsh. As for S.Smith's obvious technical deficiencies and who is he playing test cricket- perhaps you should be asking teh selctors.
Bayman
Guest
Nambucco, While the kids all strive to climb the cricketing ladder, so too the coaches. The end result is a player like Warner, and I mean no offence, who can represent his country at T20 and not be good enough to be in the first 20 for NSW at Shield level. The coaching equivalent, it seems, is Tim Neilsen. What does he actually do? The curious thing about all this 20/20 style cricket at junior level - is the emerging Blues programme any different? - is that it has obviously become more important to win games, any games, than play and teach cricket properly. Consequently, kids - and no doubt emerging Blues - are being picked for their size and ability to flog a ball rather than their technique and cricket knowhow. Great at U12/U14/U16 but hardly useful beyond that stage of their career. Most of these "hitters" will have disappeared without trace because, frankly, they're just not very good - but they've got the cap and shirt. Unfortunately, some of those who are good but have been ignored - maybe just "too small" - will also have disappeared because the encouragement factor has been zero - largely because most junior coaches have no bloody clue about technique. Nor do they care because it's the win/loss ratio which makes them feel good and get noticed for a higher role - not how many good players they have produced. Curiously, Michael Clarke's personal coach gets a lot of kudos and he also has had a lot to do with Phil Hughes. I may be wrong but I'm sure I read sometime this year that the coach was going to get MC to improve his stroke play for the shorter versions of the game. It seems to me that this is precisely what is wrong with Australian cricket at present. Poor shot execution, poor shot selection, poor foot work. Why should this coach get any credit at all? Why should there be coaches, full stop? I have long been an admirer of Steve Smith and hopeful of his early elevation to the Test team. So far, it must be said, I've been sadly disappointed. He simply does not look like a Test number seven or eight, let alone a number six with aspirations of a higher spot. His get out shot in Melbourne was, how do I say this, appalling. He just stood up straight and went whack. No foot work - his feet didn't actually move from the batting stance position - and surprise, surprise, bottom edge onto the stumps and out. The bowler must have felt embarrassed to get a Test wicket so easily. If this is modern coaching then the sooner we line all the coaches up and shoot them, the better. Where the hell is Saddam Hussain when you need him? And don't get me started on yet another Aussie batsman getting out by letting the cherry go without playing a shot. Yes, Watto, I could be talking about you! Who has told these guys that straight balls can be prodded with a pad and everything will be alright? A short clue - if it's close enough to be given out it was probably close enough to use the bat. Indeed, we can assume it was mandatory! Having said that, of course, hands up all those who have lost count of the batsmen - Australians, that is - who have been dismissed prodding forward in defensive fashion. In those bygone days of yore, most players got themselves out but at least they were playing an attacking shot. It was relatively rare for a defensive minded player to be comprehensively beaten and dismissed, be it bowled, lbw or caught. In Melbourne alone it happened half a dozen times at least in the course of two innings. So, all those modern coaches who are still under the impression that lunging on the front foot is the only way to bat I say this - check out the bloody scorebooks you incompetent fools. This is what modern coaching has done to the game. It is patently clear that too many idiots have had far too much say for too long. Maybe Ian Chappell was right about coaches! Poor technique and an inability for any modern batsman to bat for more than an hour or two without getting tired and losing concentration. Yes, Watto, you again! Just long enough for an ODI or T20 though. The bottom line is this. If what we are seeing at Test level today makes us shudder, just imagine what we are in for in ten, twenty years time. Sorry, Nambucco. Still, I'm sure James Sutherland is measured by the balance sheet, not the rankings, so the chances of James, or any administrator really, making a decision for the betterment of the players or the game is remote - especially if it clashes with those revenue streams. When you hear old Suther go on about the excitement of the Big Bash it makes me wonder if he's not working too hard. Perhaps, he just hasn't had time to watch a bit of telly or head to the ground to see for himself. It must be the case because otherwise James would know what we know. England are not just beating us, they're smashing us and the worst part is that it looks so bloody inevitable. Still, I'm sure the Big Bash will put a smile on our faces.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Nambucco,you have seen my reply to jamesb in this thread and it is incumbent upon parents to protest.Many coaches at the underage level are missing the point of the game if they encourage kids to run before they can walk. Kids are impressionable and it is up to elders to give direction. CA need to be castigated for allowing this to happen at the grassroots..Twenty20 has a place as entertainment and a fund raiser but it is not the main game.
Nambucco Deliria
Guest
My son plays first grade U-12 in the ACT. This year the 'powers that be' have instigated a T20 element to the season AT THIS AGE. Even at U12 first grade half the players struggle to play a convincing 'Boycottesque' forward defensive but, to win games, coaches seem to be encouraging players to reverse sweep etc etc. There is, quite lireally, no hope when this is allowed to happen.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Sheek,the answers as I have said ad nauseum lie more in our past than in our future. You are astute and perceptive with your comments on the volunteers. The great players will find a way around mediocre structures and coaches but it is the not so greats(99%) that will not improve without the proper structures. Sacrifice some money and play a proper shield with all the players. In three years we will be back to the top. But it requires hard work and a harder taskmaster. Happy New Year,Sheek
sheek
Guest
Vinay, I've long believed that national success was underpinned by a strong national domestic comp. For example, Australia usually with its cricket via Sheffield Shield; South African & New Zealand rugby via Currie Cup & NPC; Italy & Germany football via the Serie A & Bundersliga. But in the world of professional sport this is no longer necessarily the case. England football's Barclays Premier league is the most televised in the world, but finding top English players among the leading teams is difficult - they're full of foreigners. Much the same could be said about England & France's rugby Aviva Premiership & Top 14. Both comps are full of southern hemisphere mercenaries. The Sheffield Shield used to be strong because all the leading players participated. Consequently, the young up & comers were tested by & learnt from the best, by playing alongside or against them. This no longer occurs with the top 16 or so players never available for Sheffield Shield. If the SS dies, what will repalce it, & how effective will it be? It has occured to me there is a more serious problem with Australian sport. Those wonderful, amateur coaches, the dads, friends & teachers, are walking away from sport in droves. The bottom line is we can't afford to lose these people, in any sport. I think in the past, they were the unsung heroes. They gave kids their intiial solid grounding, which was further developed at school, then in grade & national domestic comps. But as we've seen at the Wallabies, & now with the Baggy Greens, players are coming into the elite level still devoid of essential skills. Oh sure, they're bigger, faster, stronger, fitter, more athletic, but they seem to lack the skills required, especially mentally, to cope. The coaches at the elite level seem to be coaching by numbers - follow the dots. Everyone do the same thing. The coaches are frightened to lose their jobs. Not one coach, but usually a whole squad of them, often sending different messages to players, all trying to justify their existence. Consequently, players are stunted. Not physically, but mentally & emotionally. Unfortunately, I don't have the answers. But neither it seems, do those entrusted with the authority & responsibility. But hey, another report or 300 will no doubt highlight the problems. Meanwhile the ship flounders.....
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Brett,you Little Creature,may 2011 be Happy and fulfilling to you and your family. Ring me sometime on the 3rd and you can buy me the beer you have been threatening me with. Best wishes,once again to ALL the roarers and may you all be blessed with happiness above all other things.
Brett McKay
Expert
and long may that be the case, Vinay. The cream will always rise, as they say.. Happy New Year, good sir, see you in Sydney. And Happy New Year to all the Roarers, too....
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Lolly,happily ,I think,the class based structure is breaking down in England and the asian influence is definitely on display with Mahmood,shazad and Rashid. In australia it also shows with usman that the pathway is not as blocked as some would imagine. in the end you can't keep a good 'un down.
Lolly
Guest
Johnny, Vinay, the gloating certainly goes on online, but I don't know many people in England who are into cricket so I haven't been exposed to much of it. It still seems a class-based sport here and most of my friends are either not English or didn't go to private schools. It being on Sky doesn't help. I have one Spanish friend who has lived in the UK long enough to know enough to tease me about it, but that's about it! Happy New Year to you too, Vinay.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
JonnyP,in all seriousness,England are to be commended for sticking with Cook and allowing Pietersen the room to be himself and still contribute. I believe Pietersen is vital for the World game. He projects an aura of excitment and unpredictability in what is becoming an altogether characterless game. people like Sehwag and pietersen are the true entertainers of the cricket.
JonnyP
Guest
Vinay, nobody's gloating ...More relief, but us English have had to take it for a couple of decades , it is quite satisfying to see the Aussie press attack "their own" for once
jamesb
Guest
totally agree Vinay "We lack a decent coach and top management." I also hear good things from Victoria about players like Alex Keath and Ryan Carters. I hope vic give them a chance. Isn't funny that Clarke has been under pressure this summer to score a run. So what happens next, he becomes captain, to put more pressure on him. Well i'm off to work, happy new year Vinay and everyone on the roar
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
Lolly,I expect to see more of this in the future. This should not be about mates picking mates. Leave that to the politicians. Cricket is a more serious business than politics. And Lolly,a special happy New year to you. It must be awful,to hear the poms gloating. In saying that I admire their planning and execution in this campaign. australia can and should learn from this.
Vinay Verma
Roar Guru
jamesb,there is nothing wrong with the talent pool in Aussie cricket. it is the lack of clear thinking and "entitlement" syndrome that is one of the debilitating factors. Nobody is entitled to anything. That went out with the kings and queens. You have to work for what you get. And if that is not enough then you have to work harder. but when working harder,ie the shield,does not count then the signals are mixed. In Pattinson,Hazelwood and Copeland we have bowlers of the future...and throw in George,too. In Maddinson,Khawaja,Hughes,Finch,Paine,Mitchell marsh(and many more) you have the nucleus f Internatinal class batsmen. We lack a decent coach and top management.