Professionalism starts at the top

Professionalism is the watchword of every major sporting organisation around the world.

In the modern era of professional sport, players are held to rigorous account not only for their performances, but also for their actions outside the boundaries of the sporting arena.

The modern sportsman is a role model, expected to meet high standards of acceptable behaviour.

When they behave improperly or without regard to social norms or standards of decent behaviour, they tarnish the image of the sport.

Ricky Ponting, as covered in the excellent Australian Story documentary that aired last night, was disciplined in 1999 for his involvement in a fight at a bar.

James O’Connor, of rugby union fame, was disciplined in 2011 for failing to attend a team function.

Over the last two years, Wallaby teammates Digby Ioane, Quade Cooper, and Kurtley Beale have also faced punitive measures for unbecoming conduct.

Andrew Symonds lost his career in Australian cricket after he famously failed to attend a team training session and instead went fishin’.

These situations are guaranteed to occur when a wide variety of different people are brought into an organisation of high behavioural standards.

That they are dealt with in proportion to the offense and with discretion to the continued smooth running of the team is a defining characteristic of good management.

Proportion. Discretion. There’s the rub. Get it right, and the organisation rolls on with an implemented solution, ready to focus on its prime directive – playing and winning.

Get it wrong and you can make a bad situation far worse.

So I don’t mind telling you that I was disgusted with the preferred course of action of the Australian coach, captain, and chairman of selectors when they made their decision to drop four players from the Test side.

Given that captain Clarke has indicated that this is an attempt to correct a pattern of undisclosed behaviour, it is impossible to know just how urgent any disciplinary action could have been.

What is plain as day is that the action taken could not have been proportionate, nor taken with due discretion.

The Australian team is not between series, and it is not in Australia. It is halfway through a four match series in India in which they have already been soundly thrashed twice.

There are not one, but two Ashes series to come later this year. The Australian cricket team is in a bad way.

So to bring it back to a standard that they consider acceptable, the powers that be immediately axe four players.

One best performing bowler, one vice-captain, one yet-to-be-tested-but-badly-needed specialist batsman, and Mitchell Johnson?

This is how Australian cricket chooses to demonstrate its professionalism? What are these players being paid for, to win matches or to fill in questionnaires?

What is the team management being paid for, to optimise the performance of the team or to run a high-school?

If Australian cricket were truly being managed professionally, it would have found another way to discipline its players without torpedoing its own hopes for squaring an important series.

Make no mistake, professionalism starts at the top.