Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

International Cricket Thread

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    I'm not sure about that. The Australian Men's* cricket team is representing Cricket Australia as an organisation. CA clearly have a right to be involved, in fact it's pretty well impossible for them not to be - the ICC are not going to tell one of it's members who they should include in their side, only those they must exclude for certain periods. If they want to hold their teams to higher standards of integrity than other boards have previously done and therefore declare certain players ineligible for selection, that is their choice.

    * - I happened to be on the Aussie Board's website at one point during all this, and was struck that the live scorecards gave the sides as South Africa Men vs Australia Men rather than South Africa vs Australia. Kudos to them on that one.
    Last edited by Janik; 26-03-2018, 20:47.

    Comment


      Why shouldn't Cricket Australia deal with a disciplinary issue relating to their players?

      As for all countries cheating... it might a reasonable assumption to make, but if Bancroft's transgression -- specifically bringing on to the field a foreign object to tamper the ball with -- was as widespread as the assumption declares, then we'd have cameras picking up these things far more frequently than they do (which is, in fact, rarely).

      No doubt every country pushes the boundaries of what's legal or ethical, but on the scale of cheating, this had few demonstrable precedents. While one must beware of overreaction, I cannot really see how test cricket is being served by trivialising what Australia did, certainly not based on assumptions about what others might be doing.

      Also, there is the issue of senior players having a junior guy doing the cheating for them. That is, I think, a thoroughly shitty thing to do. One can view that in a pretty strong light. So it's not just about the cheating, but the manner of it.
      Last edited by G-Man; 26-03-2018, 21:01.

      Comment


        I’m not trivialising what some of the Australians* did (you’ll see upthread that I think long bans are warranted and Smith and Lehman should forfeit their roles) but was responding to the comment of “I mean, we all know that the Australian Cricket Family cheat - that's a given” which was tipping over in to the kind of hypocritical sanctimony about Australian cricket which is all too common on here.

        *as opposed to “Australia”
        Last edited by Ray de Galles; 27-03-2018, 09:09.

        Comment


          Originally posted by G-Man View Post
          As for all countries cheating... it might a reasonable assumption to make, but if Bancroft's transgression -- specifically bringing on to the field a foreign object to tamper the ball with -- was as widespread as the assumption declares, then we'd have cameras picking up these things far more frequently than they do (which is, in fact, rarely).
          Fanie de Villiers may have given you the answer to that today. According to the BBC this is what he told one of your radio stations:-

          ex-South Africa fast bowler Fanie de Villiers saying he told camera operators to keep an eye on the Australians in the field while commentating during the third Test in Cape Town.

          "I said earlier on, that if they could get reverse swing in the 26th, 27th, 28th over then they are doing something different from what everyone else does," de Villiers told RSN Radio.

          "We actually said to our cameramen, 'go out (and) have a look, boys. They're using something'.

          "They searched for an hour and a half until they saw something and then they started following Bancroft and they actually caught him out at the end."


          Would it have got caught without what sounds like targeted surveillance that took up a good chunk of the day (90 minutes to settle on Bancroft, the x minutes more before he was yellow-handed) before it actually turned anything up? Well, that will have to remain hypothetical.

          Personally I remain rather skeptical that the Aussies behaviour was particularly out of the ordinary.

          Comment


            The article G-Man linked to is pretty accurate in capturing the national mood - and so too is David Squires' tweet. A combination of a long-simmering anger at the way the Australian team plays its cricket and frustration that, amidst so many far more more important things, it is a cricket controversy that people care about. It is not the ball tampering per se - it is the arrogance and long-standing poor behaviour that has led to the feeling of omnipotence that must have been around for players to even contemplate such premeditated stupidity.

            This is why Lehmann will go too. He's set in place the philosophy that it must be win at all costs. Ironic that it will see him lose his job.

            Comment


              I'd like to hear that confirmed by the TV producers. De Villiers is a bit of a, let's say, raconteur. But even an ex-player suggesting that camera operators should look out for ball tampering suggests that something out of the ordinary was taking place (there were allegations of Warner's ball tampering in the second test to begin with). There were grounds for suspicion in the first place.

              To be sure: I'm not suggesting that ball tampering isn't happening or that what the Australians did was unique. That would be foolish. But I suggest that the extent of the ball-tampering with foreign objects which we've seen in Cape Town is not as common as to be ordinary. If it was, we'd hear and see more of that.

              Comment


                This is also good about the current contradictions in Australian life https://www.smh.com.au/national/chea...27-p4z6fc.html and on a lighter note https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1kAp1WBwV8
                Last edited by Uncle Ethan; 27-03-2018, 06:23.

                Comment


                  That's a good article. Link didn't work by the way, this one should https://www.smh.com.au/national/chea...27-p4z6fc.html

                  Comment


                    I still don't quite see either where all this raging hypocrisy or moral sanctimony that Ray De Galles and others refer to is coming from. The South African response, for a start, is pretty restrained. Coverage of the situation in sensible UK media (the tabloids aren't worth bothering with) also seems quite fair-minded. In fact, some of the people making a big thing out of it in the UK made a similarly big thing out of Stuart Broad's refusal to walk at Trent Bridge in 2013, Jonathan Agnew being one example.

                    The greatest outrage, as has been pointed out, has been coming from within Australia. And that seems to be because Australians really don't like the way their cricket team has conducted itself over quite a long period.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by ad hoc View Post
                      That's a good article. Link didn't work by the way, this one should https://www.smh.com.au/national/chea...27-p4z6fc.html
                      Thanks Ad Hoc. I must have clipped the end off when copying.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by jameswba View Post
                        The greatest outrage, as has been pointed out, has been coming from within Australia. And that seems to be because Australians really don't like the way their cricket team has conducted itself over quite a long period.
                        I went to Australia 23 years ago and my family out there - most of whom were born out there or lived there decades - hated the Australian cricket team for the attitudes, the sledging etc. So much so they supported England in The Ashes.

                        I was talking to someone yesterday about whether this will be Steve Smith's legacy. Like all I really remember Atherton for is the dirt in his pockets row. In years to come we'll think 'Oh yeah, sandpaper' when Smith pops up on telly.

                        Comment


                          Originally posted by jameswba View Post
                          The greatest outrage, as has been pointed out, has been coming from within Australia. And that seems to be because Australians really don't like the way their cricket team has conducted itself over quite a long period.
                          That's a fair point. I play cricket for an ANZAC team in Nairobi, and the Australians are absolutely mortified over this - but they have been saying for a while now that this is an Australian team that is hard to love. They all fully support the suggestion that the whole management team (Smith, Warner, Boof, Sutherland) either resign or get a year's ban. Start again and get someone with a different mindset and take the hit on the results for the next two years.

                          Comment


                            Originally posted by jameswba View Post
                            I still don't quite see either where all this raging hypocrisy or moral sanctimony that Ray De Galles and others refer to is coming from.
                            Well, I gave the exact quote I was responding to as an example of it.

                            Comment


                              I think the quote to which you refer - “I mean, we all know that the Australian Cricket Family cheat - that's a given” - is mine. But I'm not sure it was raging hypocrisy or moral sanctimony. It was stated to clarify my position that it was Smith's lack of candour and moral fibre once found out that was the more serious charge - in my eyes.

                              Comment


                                The rest of your post made that point clearly but that particular line obviously implied exceptionalism in Australia's cheating.

                                Comment


                                  I think the position was absolute and not relative - and stood without reference or comparison to any other countries.

                                  Comment


                                    We had a discussion a couple of weeks ago about whether sledging has been more systematic under Australian men's captains than other nations, from Chappelli onwards. This is linked in the sense that Australia has been associated with unsportsmanlike conduct since well before Smith. Chappelli also made non-walking more systematic, as well as intimidation of the tail.

                                    Cheating is a continuum and sandpaper is the extreme end. It is rare that tampering is this blatant. But I think it's fair to say that Aussie male cricket culture has been problematic for decades, and that could be a factor behind the assumptions Smith made when he went farther to the extreme than previously. They had been on a slippery slope.

                                    However, other countries need to evaluate the slope their teams have been on, albeit to a less extreme extent. England's behaviour has worsened in the 'Stokes' era. South Africa were not innocents in this series. Umpires need stronger authority and support to stamp out the verbal and physical over-aggression.

                                    Comment


                                      Our own E10 leading a good discussion on Guardian live blog today.

                                      Comment


                                        Smith Warner and Bancroft sent home. Lehmann stays on.

                                        Comment


                                          Boof - jammy fucker.

                                          Comment


                                            So, it was Warner after all

                                            In reference to the view within the team that Warner had hatched the idea and delegated it to his opening partner Cameron Bancroft with the captain Steven Smith's approval, ESPNcricinfo has been told "the truth is starting to come out". With the CA Board holding a teleconference with the head of integrity Iain Roy and the chief executive James Sutherland following the former's hurried investigation, sources close to the board confirmed Warner "is the issue".

                                            Comment


                                              Wasn't Smith headed home anyway, given the ICC ban? My guess is that all three players will miss the June ODI series in England and might not be back until their big home series against India in November.

                                              Comment


                                                Originally posted by Ray de Galles View Post
                                                Well, I gave the exact quote I was responding to as an example of it.
                                                Right, one quote to justify a sweeping statement about 'hypocrisy' and 'sanctimony' that are 'common (on this board)'. As I said, I don't see it. There's been plenty of criticism of the Australian team on here for sure, but most of it has been backed up by examples and placed in a context.

                                                Comment


                                                  Originally posted by Satchmo Distel View Post
                                                  Wasn't Smith headed home anyway, given the ICC ban? My guess is that all three players will miss the June ODI series in England and might not be back until their big home series against India in November.
                                                  Purely selfishly, I'd be happy with an outcome that saw Smith and Bancroft coming back (after a not too long period) and Warner banned for life. But that's just what I want because I can't stand Warner and I think Smith would be a loss to the game. It doesn't have any basis in ethics or morality just my own biases.

                                                  Comment


                                                    Jim Maxwell has said he doesn't think Warner will play for Australia again, so there could be something in that regardless. People dislike Warner because he has a long record of saying and doing dislikable things, so in that sense your reasoning is sound enough. I'd guess if CA decide he won't play again, he'll still be free to earn his coin playing T20.

                                                    That aside, BBC sent it's sports editor to Johannesburg to "ask" Lehmann if the Aussies "cheated during the Ashes". Well done there.

                                                    Comment

                                                    Working...
                                                    X