February 9, 2008
Virender Sehwag’s got a bit of a mouth on him, eh, viewers? Not only does he seem to forget his team has the poorer record against Australia, but now also reckons Australia is “scared” of losing at the MCG tomorrow.
“Nobody else beats them here, so that’s why maybe they are scared and a little worried about the Indian team.”
Frankly, from watching the Aussies prepare for the match, I don’t see any different attitudes at play. I think Australia takes each game, and each opponent, equally seriously but… fear? No, Virender Sehwag, I don’t think so!
February 7, 2008
Cricket Australia is playing silly buggers in relation to the upcoming Indian Premier League that several Aussie superstars want to take part in.
In a nutshell, it appears that CA wants promotion of its sponsors during the IPL, but Indian cricket chief Lalit Modi has, quite rightly in my opinion, called this request unreasonable and said in the Sydney Morning Herald:
“If Foster’s sponsors Cricket Australia, and a player goes to play for Hampshire, they can’t get coverage in England. No organisation gives this non-competitive guarantee. It is up to [CA], they have been told our position and we will not move on this.”
I think that puts it quite succinctly. No one seems to care about this stuff when an Australian goes off to the UK to play… but put them in this new and exciting Indian Premier League, and suddenly everyone wants a piece of the action.
I call it hypocritical, myself. Pull your heads in, CA!
February 4, 2008
Last night’s washed-out ODI between Australia and India was a pretty disappointing affair, although I have to say there’s still probably one thing worse than watching covers getting placed on and off a cricket pitch on TV… and that’s seeing it happen live at the ground! I was at the Sydney Test earlier this year, so I speak from experience! Nothing to do but sit and drink beer.
It’s difficult to say where the match would have gone, had it continued. While it’s true that the Australians were chasing less than 200 and were scoring very freely – when they were able to be on the field – they also lost three fast wickets fairly cheaply, too. It could have become a very interesting match.
Probably the one exciting and notable aspect of the whole match was Brett Lee’s five wicket haul. Lee has matured into an absolutely amazing bowler, filling Glenn McGrath’s shoes with ease – something that many critics didn’t think he was capable of. Good on ya, Binga. Well done, mate!
February 3, 2008
A rather strange little story appeared in the news today. It seems that Cricket Australia appointed a chairman last October called Jack Clarke but no one actually noticed. If you’ve never heard of him in cricket circles before, the story notes that he only played some district cricket in Adelaide, of all places.
Apparently Clarke has a bit of a “boisterous style” which has people worried about how Cricket Australia will deal with the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), now that it’s starting to really throw its weight around, such as its rather petulant display during the whole Harbhajan Singh affair, recently.
Personally, I don’t see a problem with someone like Clarke. Isn’t it times like these we need a bit of a “hard man” at the top of Cricket Australia? Someone who can go toe to toe with the BCCI and not mince words with them? Someone who’s not afraid of “we’re quitting the tour if we don’t get our way”-style threats?
Enter former Australia captain, Mark Taylor, who is a CA board director, and is apparently already lining up for Clarke’s desk when he leaves the role, perhaps around 2011. Today’s piece seems to suggest that there’s been a push to place Taylor in Clarke’s role already, but the timing isn’t quite right.
I think this is madness. Whoever in Taylor’s support camp has placed this story in the media need to pull their head in. Clarke sounds precisely like the kind of man we need in the role right now and, given that “their man” Taylor will have the top role in a few years anyway, now’s not the time to make ripples.
February 2, 2008
Hell hath no fury like an Australian cricket team scorned. India learned that lesson in the Twenty20 match last night, being crushed for 74 in a little over 17 overs, and then watching the Aussies reach 1/75 with 52 balls remaining.
Stand-in skipper Michael Clarke absolutely revelled in the game’s atmosphere, running around the ground like some kind of demented Duracell Bunny.
Adam Gilchrist, playing his last game of Twenty20 for Australia also lifted for the occasion. His on-field commentary for Channel 9 was a delight, as well.
Possibly the weirdest sight of the night was Sachin Tendulkar sitting on the sidelines. As one of the commentators said during the match, here’s a guy who sits among the elite of world cricket, from any era, and India wasn’t playing him. That decision boggled my mind – and the minds of half of India, I imagine.
February 1, 2008
Indian cricket secretary Niranjan Shah makes a very good point as he calls for an overhaul of the International Cricket Council code of conduct after the recent Andrew Symonds and Harbhajan Singh row in Sydney.
“This is sport, and you do not want a situation where an argument between two players becomes a big legal battle in a courtroom…”
“The code has to be changed. The role of the referee needs to be greater, so he can calm down these situations before they go bad. And the umpires should also do more to calm the situation when players have an argument…”
Quite right, I think. There is a school of thought that suggests what happens on the field should stay on the field, which supports this point of view. Now, while there are perhaps some racial slurs that might need extra treatment off the field, perhaps a lot of the bad blood of the Sydney test could have been avoided if the match referee’s had been allowed a greater role, on the field. I fully support match referee’s playing a greater role in these disputes, at the time they occur, rather than waiting for weeks and drawing it out into a major saga which no doubt excites journalists, but which does very little for the rest of us.
January 31, 2008
With every man and his dog commenting on the current spat between Australia and India, Ricky Ponting has finally stood up and suggested people not judge modern cricketers by the standards of the 1950s. And good on him, too.
“I think one thing that a lot of people overlook is that we are not playing cricket in the 1950s and a lot of people I think are still living in the 1950s…”
“It’s now a fully professional game. It’s not a game of just going out there and having a bit of a bat and a bowl and having a laugh and giggle with the opposition…”
All of which is perfectly, unarguably true. Many Australians seem to think we should still be playing cricket like it’s the 1950s… nay, the 1930s in some cases! And that’s patently absurd. I think we’re finally starting to see professional cricket emerging from “the gentleman’s game” and, while that will no doubt cause some to shed a tear and lament the oft-quoted good old days, it really is an unstoppable (and quite natural) part of the game turning professional.
As the old saying goes, you can’t have your cake and eat it too. Either these people want the game to progress – and endure the changes that come with it – or they want it to be played for shits and giggles, with no real remuneration for players and limited coverage in the media. C’mon, what will it be, people?
