With the third Test imminent, our last remaining hope of regaining the urn during the English summer may well rest with a man who has the ability to take the game away from opposition as quickly as he is able to divide opinion.
David Warner’s blatant disregard for the responsibilities associated with being an Australian cricketer have come to the fore recently thanks to his completely inappropriate behaviour.
The canvas on which a sporting star’s career and legacy is painted these days is very much in the spotlight for the media and the public.
The higher the profile, the greater the scrutiny and need for discretion and smart decision-making. It’s a cliché nowadays yes, but that’s how it simply is.
Did he forget what it means to wear the baggy green cap when he blew Robert Craddock up at 4am Indian time about what is, at the end of the day, just an opinion piece published in a newspaper.
That’s absolutely no discredit to the journalist or journalistic writing. The point is it’s just an opinion by someone who is paid to write his opinion.
It is the job of journalists “to do their job” and of course they serve an important purpose.
Let journalists say what they want within the confines of accepted protocols and defamation laws. Opinions are like the proverbial. We all have one. I have one right now.
Warner should have fired back and answered his critics with runs and showed us all that he deserves to be in the Australian team on merit. He’s had a lean run of it recently until his 193 for Australia A last week. Why hang yourself out to dry in the public eye?
Whatever his gripe with Craddock and Conn that sparked the Twitter rant, it didn’t need to be aired in public.
I’m sure these blokes are quite approachable and were prepared to hear what he had to say.
Warner was having a whinge about an issue that didn’t even involve him. Instead, there was a fall-out and he certainly didn’t do his cause any good.
Just when it looked like things couldn’t get any worse in our Ashes preparation, the whole ‘walkabout’ incident took place on the same day the English gave us a hiding.
The clear, full story hasn’t been made public but once again it seems Warner took offence to something that didn’t actually involve him.
It’s alleged that he threw a punch at another man. Never mind that he was an opposition player.
Last I heard on the news and in all media outlets, the Government was making it perfectly clear that any form of assault, premeditated or otherwise, had a zero tolerance policy.
The selection panel had no choice but to stand Warner down for an extended period to send a message that this behaviour is simply unacceptable.
David Warner allegedly attempted to assault a man and his punishment, as far as a lot of people were concerned, was to carry the drinks and miss a few games in the Champions Trophy and against county opposition.
I’m not saying he should have been punished more severely, just conscious of how bad it looked.
Surely sportspeople and celebrities have figured it out by now that if you put yourself in situations that have potential for negative outcomes, then there’s a good chance that trouble will find you.
For me, cricket, especially Test cricket, is and always will be about the battle.
The battle between bat and ball; the battle between concentration and a mistake after six hours at the crease; the battle between the chase for the last two wickets in the fading light.
Even the battle between keeping your spot and a public awaiting a fall from grace.
The best, even when flawed and distracted (read Shane Warne, Brian Lara, Viv Richards) were always fully involved in that battle, mentally and physically.
At the moment, Warner is having a tough time picking his. Just when it seemed like things were back on track and Warner was focused on the job at hand, there was another incident during the tour game in Africa.
Warner laughed it off as friendly banter though the accounts of what happened suggest it was a little more heated than that. Sledging is a part of the game. Squaring up to the opposition for a confrontation isn’t.
This may sound like a rant but it really isn’t. It’s just an impassioned plea to Dave Warner to remember what is associated with wearing that hallowed green cap in a changing world.
Freddie Flintoff wrote yesterday in the English tabloid The Sun that if Warner gets picked for the third Test, just let him be.
No need to sledge him because he will find his way to trouble again. What is that saying about how England view the entire situation and his character?
The poor form of our batting order has backed the selectors into a bit of a corner here as well. We wouldn’t be having this conversation about picking Warner had our batsmen performed in the first two games.
He’s one of our best players when on song though and is one of the first picked in all three forms of the game. His aggression is exactly what we need right now to put Jimmy Anderson off his game.
I don’t mind if he gets picked for the third Test, so long as he scores a million runs as we attempt the impossible from our dire position heading into the Old Trafford test.
Warner’s repost to me may be that his pride for the baggy green has always been his highest priority.
The thing is, that pride has to be exemplified off the field, not just on it.
Acts of assault or carrying on in a public forum are unfortunately not the conduct becoming of a sportsperson who represents Australia.
Not to mention all our governing bodies are so image conscious these days. And why is that?
Because of sponsors who bring money into our sports. I don’t like it, but it’s the way it is in 2013.
There’s a reason why the Australian cricket captaincy is revered as “the second most important job in the country”.
It carries a heavy weight for the man in the job. What he needs is the 10 players that he leads making things as easy as possible for him.
I hope Warner starts picking his battles correctly again and gets back to what he does best: dividing the opposition. Not dividing opinion.
A Mans Not A Camel
Guest
Hookin' YT, curious, did you ever watch Gilchrist bat in Australia's middle order in test cricket? That's what we are saying Warner needs to be - Gilchrist. He needs to come in after the more patient batsmen have done their duties, and smash a quick fire century along side the bowlers to not only up the total, but demoralise them prior to their innings, like Gilchrist did time and time again. Surely you cannot say with a straight face that Gilchrist was a mistake in Australian cricket? In limited overs - that's where he's an opener, to bludgeon attacks and get the shine off the ball. He's not made of the right stuff to open in tests, just like Gilchrist wasn't. That's what the first 5 batsmen are for - occupying the crease, patiently making runs - by the time Warner comes in, and has bowlers at the other end, he needs to score fast to ensure he can make big scores. Hussey was another, although he went about it differently to what Warner and Gilchrist would/should, made his runs quickly.
twodogs
Guest
Great comment Gr8rwest. Aw, however you do it. Warner is much better than most think and at least as good as I reckon. Just gotta get him to realise as talented as he is, he really is not that important, and the world will still revolve without him. At present he only suffers from ' I've hit the big time ' syndrome and the deletion process is close to complete. All you naysayers can't believe it eh? Well I'll say it- he could well be the best since the Don. The tools are in his shed. He now must apply himself more than ever
Chris
Guest
The English reaction to the punch is one of considerable amusement, not outrage. I can understand some Australians not wanting him to represent you, but I can assure you - for what it's worth - that no one on this side is saying he's a disgrace, shouldn't be playing blah, blah, blah. Not that it makes any difference of course, but it's a reminder that we're all parochial about things those outside don't really care about.
Sandy
Guest
They have got until the toss to finalise the line-up. We are still waiting to hear if Pietersen is in or out...so no biggie.
Hookin' YT
Guest
Really? Know a lot about Test cricket? T20 fan? Batting first. Traditionally its scoring 500 over almost 2 days at 3 an over. Take 10 wickets for about 300 by stumps on day 3. Score 200 on day 4 leaving the other mob 400 to chase. Take another 10 wickets for less than 300. Bowling first. Take 10 wickets for under 300 by stumps on day 1. Score 500 over almost 2 days at 3 an over. Take 10 wickets for under 300 by stumps on day 4. Score 150ish on last day to win test. See any run a ball horsesh*t in the plan? Me neither.
Sandy
Guest
Thank God, some sanity. Cheers Camel. Some comments on here are jaw dropping.
Andrew
Guest
The only way Australia wins is if Warner cracks a 150 at a run a ball.
DingoGray
Roar Guru
hahaha! Very good Hookin...Very amusing!
Hookin' YT
Guest
More like he is a Stallion's appendage. A 4ft wang.
not quite serious
Guest
Agree - very reluctantly - with inclusion of Warner. Look at it this way. Barring bad weather, Australia cannot bat long enough to force a draw. So the only way of not losing the game is to win it. Now look at the Aust. batting line-up. Is there anyone there except for Warner and Clarke who could win a match off their own bat if he played the innings of his life? So the choice, as I see it, is between the very slim chance that Warner may come off, or no chance at all.
Roge
Guest
Flintoff's being way too kind. If I was in the English team I'd be going out of my way to provoke him.
Hookin' YT
Guest
Spot on Rob. We need a Waugh or a Border like player - someone with a strike rate of <50 who will graft big 100s. Instead we opt for a cavalier bogan. The BBL marketing campaign on at the moment?
Balanced
Guest
@ Robroy "Australia is two nil down and they should use the remaning three matches to consolidate and plan for the next ashes". Wow, that is truly inspirational. 2-0 down in a best of 5 series and Robroy's war cry is unleashed: "Let's give up!" It is highly unlikely that Australia can win three matches in a row, but those in charge are rightly trying to win the third test and not giving up. Like him or not, Warner has an x-factor. If he gets set he can turn a game around in a way that no others, not even clarke, could do. The likelihood that Warner can do this first up might not be high, but it is a greater than zero chance. And it's not as though they are taking out a high-scoring in-form batsman to accomodate him. What's the worst that can happen? He makes the same number of runs as the man he replaces, while saving an extra 10-20 in the field. His inclusion is a calculated risk that any sensible leader would take. At 2-0 down in a best of five the need is to WIN games, not reduce the losses. If we lose the third test then maybe games 4 and 5 could be approached with the future in mind, but for now, with the series still up for grabs, I'm glad the selectors are showing a positive mindset.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
While it is true that Hughes has the most runs on tour (436), only 83 of those runs have come in the Tests, making him 6th for Test runs scored behind Agar, Watson, Clarke, Rogers and Haddin. Khawaja only played the second Test and has a better Test average. Only purely batting performance he has out performed Smith, but Smith did just score 102 not out and does offer a wicket taking bowling option. That leaves Hughes as the most likely omission, Smith's back problems may be the determining factor.
Benjamin Dover
Guest
Why have we shown so much leniancy for Warner and not put Katich back in the team...? All he did was upset precious Clarke.. Hes been scoring runs in England. I believe the excuse was his age last time, though we gave Chris Rogers a start who was born in 1977.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
Surely the real issue is consistency of contribution, if you look at what Warner has actually contributed over the last couple of years he's been the 2nd most consistent, behind only Clarke. From his 34 innings he has contributed the 2nd most 100s, 3, equal most 50s, 7, and less 0s, 2, than Clarke, Watson, Hughes and Haddin, with only Clarke having more innings: MJ Clarke: Inns x 44, 100s x 9, 50s x 7, 0s x 3 DA Warner: Inns x 34, 100s x 3, 50s x 7, 0s x2 EJM Cowan: Inns x 32, 100s x 1, 50s x 6, 0s x2 SR Watson: Inns x 30, 100s x 0, 50s x 4, 0s x3 PJ Hughes: Inns x 30, 100s x 1, 50s x 5, 0s x4 BJ Haddin: Inns x 23, 100s x 0, 50s x 3, 0s x3 MS Wade: Inns x 22, 100s x 2, 50s x 3, 0s x0 UT Khawaja: Inns x 11, 100s x 0, 50s x 2, 0s x0 SPD Smith: Inns x 8, 100s x 0, 50s x 2, 0s x0 CJL Rogers: Inns x 4, 100s x 0, 50s x 1, 0s x0 By any reasonable assessment of recent on field Test performances Warner should be selected, probably behind only Clarke.
Gr8rWeStr
Guest
Well said AMNAC!
Bearfax
Guest
Personally I dont care what he does outside of cricket, as long as its not illegal. We watch Warner because of his cricket skills, not because of his relationship problems. For mine if he is selected, I hope we see the best of him because we could certainly use it. Thing is potentially this Australian team could easily score 400+. Self belief is their biggest hurdle....and then its Anderson and Swann
A Mans Not A Camel
Guest
"Warner was having a whinge about an issue that didn’t even involve him" - are you even aware why the twitter incident happened? It was not due to the content of the article, it was because they placed a picture of Warner next to it, and the article was about IPL match fixing. He went about it the wrong way, but he had every right to be frustrated, annoyed and even angry about it. The punch - no big deal, they sat down afterwards and kept drinking, and bar staff/bouncers didn't get involved. All blown out of proportion, although admittidly in both he was not thinking of the consequences prior to going ahead with his actions, and hopefully has learned from both. There is no doubt Warner is in our best 11, i'm with a few others, #6 for me in test cricket, opener in limited overs fixtures. Very similar to how Gilchrist was utilised - blitzing the opposition at 6/7 in test cricket after the hard yards were already done by more patient batsmen, and in limited overs, doing what he he does best, bludgeoning the opposition attack and getting the shine off the new ball.
Matt
Guest
Who knows. Doesn't Hughes have the most runs so far over there, and they're apparently going to drop him for Warner. Though in saying that, aren't they playing today? Why wouldn't their lineup be finalised yet?