I knew instinctively that I had woken early. I give myself until 7am on workdays; it was four o’clock in the morning.
“Oh well”, I thought, “Might as well see how much Australia lost by”. When I had gone off to sleep, they had just lost their eighth wicket and still had less than 200 runs on the board. David Willey and Moeen Ali wouldn’t have to face a ball.
When I checked the Cricinfo scorecard that was still the case. The situation, however, would have to change very soon as they were both at the wicket. England were 6/163, still 52 runs from victory. I sat bolt upright and charged out of bed.
I don’t live alone, so I muted the television as soon as I could. There was an initial burst of noise and then nothing. No sound from anywhere. Just visuals.
Almost as soon as I started watching I realised that England were still favourites to win the match. When there’s no-one telling you how to think, you start to do some thinking of your own.
I realised something: Australia may have been losing, but they had got me out of bed. They had a team wort getting out of bed for. They should aspire for higher than an honourable loss, but it’s a good start.
(Cameron Spencer/Getty Images)
It’s also not ruinous for Australia to lose. One problem in cricket, as Bertus de Jong adroitly noted after England’s loss to Scotland, is that there are teams in the world for whom it is not the end of the world if they lose and teams for whom it is. Australia can afford to underperform.
The individual players might not be able to afford to do so – players just into the team, like Michael Neser, or irregulars, like Shaun Marsh and Kane Richardson – but their team won’t be joining them on the sidelines if they are not picked to play. That wouldn’t be the case if they were playing for a team like Scotland.
As it was, Neser, Richardson, Billy Stanlake and Andrew Tye gave their team the genuine chance that the batsmen couldn’t, even if they’re not Mitchell Starc, Pat Cummins or Josh Hazlewood.
So there you have it, folks. Welcome to the new era of Australian cricket, where Australia play England in one-day matches on Channel Nine.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Sorry about taking it as true. Wasn't true. The ABC will continue to broadcast cricket.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Thanks Paul. Hopefully the ABC continues to broadcast cricket.
Rellum
Roar Guru
To be honest nothing in those comments from CA contradict the original story. Hopefully sanity prevails.
Paul
Roar Guru
Paul, the doom meisters were out in full force over the past 24 hours because Australia batted poorly, we were going to get flogged, worst team ever, etc. It's good to see an article that presents some balance. I was all set to pack it in after Australia batted, then thought I'd watch the first couple of overs of Englands innings. I was hooked for the next hour. I was going to give it away again when England were 3 for lots but Australia took 3 more wickets, so the eyes stayed open a while longer. Yes, we lost but it wasn't a complete disaster. There's till time for the TV to stay off if Australia doesn't continue to improve, but for now, I'll be watching for sure.
Matt H
Roar Guru
Thank goodness! Otherwise no yard work would get done over summer. Thanks Paul.
Paul
Roar Guru
It's not true and CA has come out, along with the ABC and both sides of Government to say it isn't going to happen. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-14/cricket-broadcast-rights/9871820?section=sport
Matt H
Roar Guru
If that's true, it's a dumb, dumb decision. The radio rights don't go for very much anyway compared to television and they provide access for rural areas and ensure everyone in this country can be exposed to cricket. We don't want to go the way of England where cricket is receding behind pay walls everywhere. If CA are stuck for cash (Ha!) they should concentrate on maximising their streaming rights revenue.
Rellum
Roar Guru
Well if you believe that story, and it fits with CA's modus operandi, the only reason the ABC is still in the hunt is their regional reach. CA is seeking assurances that the commercial networks can broadcast into regional areas. If they can the ABC is out. It is all about money for CA. I would bet they will sacrifice some regional reach for more money in the end.
Paul Potter
Roar Guru
Just read about that. I don't support that decision either. It ruins good stories such as the resistance of Australia's unheralded bowlers at the Oval. More importantly, it will reduce access of our great game to those who live in Australia's rural areas.
Linphoma
Guest
Just read a headline: CA debating kicking the ABC out of radio cricket coverage. Someone should show the suits the door and slap them over the back of the head a few times. Some people just don't get it. The thing is these same people make positions of power and it's around the world and in every conceivable field of human endeavour. They will never get it.