Craig
World Traveller
No commentLive-streaming webcam instead?![]()
![Ph34r :ph34r: :ph34r:](/forum/images/smilies/original/ph34r.gif)
No commentLive-streaming webcam instead?![]()
He's still not really being "soft". He's standing up to the predicament and taking a strong decision to leave the game and give himself a break. Or maybe not, maybe he's **** scared as you think. But neither you, I or any of the numerous other people going on as if they know all about Tait (and calling him soft in this thread) know **** about his situation. So I think it's best if we all refrain from passing ignorant comments.This thread does raise the interesting topic regarding 'softness'.
Some criticising Tait for being 'soft' others saying that such comments are out of line.
Personally, I couldnt think of a worse profession than a top flight athlete. The career is short, your livelihood depends on your performance in every game, its high pressure and worst of all it all happens in the public domain where everyone feels free to criticise and analyse your every move.
Cricket takes it a step further with the long periods away from home, the long hours of competition and the relatively moderate financial compensation and security.
The life of a professional cricketer (especially a marginal one away from home a lot with no stability) isnt one I would aspire to or recommend for my kids.
However, and this is the big but. Some people are better at handling it than others and some dont handle it well at all. Its a skill and an attitude. If a lack of this ability is 'softness' then a person is soft.
I take no particular umbrage with the term. It is what it is. Softness is an inability to handle the pressures of a situation that others handle capably.
As much as I sympathise and identify with Tait (or as much as we know about his situation) it is being 'soft'. Not to recognise it as such takes credit away from those who possess the ability and mentality to deal with such situations.
Now at the end of the day, this could be the best thing for him. Recharge and rediscover the passion and energy. Everyone must do what is best for themselves. Others may not have needed to do similar but thats just how it is.
Yeah, that's definately it.Thread may have moved on a bit, but Tait shown up as a bit of a soft c*ck imo.
With respect, I understand the 'soft' comments. I mean, he was on top of the world when he came back from a magnificently successful WC. Indeed, he is on record as saying that when he came back, he felt like jumping on a plane and heading back over there again. By contrast, now he has performed poorly and his Test career is in (for the short term at least) jeopardy, suddenly he doesn't love the game anymore.As someone who changed their career path at about the same age very recently I more or less know how he's feeling and if you're not enjoying something there's very little point in going on with it and just going through the motions. The soft comments are ridiculous, a notion from a different age.
Whoa, hold your horses.He's still not really being "soft". He's standing up to the predicament and taking a strong decision to leave the game and give himself a break. Or maybe not, maybe he's **** scared as you think. But neither you, I or any of the numerous other people going on as if they know all about Tait (and calling him soft in this thread) know **** about his situation. So I think it's best if we all refrain from passing ignorant comments.
The way I see it, he worked hard, got into the Test side had his chance and wasn't able to take it, thus becoming disenfranchised with the whole thing. That he's not willing at this stage to go back to square one and start the whole process again to get back in, is imo fair enough. I don't see how that makes him soft especially when you have the type of injuries he's had and will have. I don't see why he has to keep going on after such a spectacular failure. I can only sympathise with cricketers who have finally gotten their chance and the ecstasy that comes with that and then have the exact opposite feeling days later once they've failed and realise their career may not be heading in the direction they've always wanted.With respect, I understand the 'soft' comments. I mean, he was on top of the world when he came back from a magnificently successful WC. Indeed, he is on record as saying that when he came back, he felt like jumping on a plane and heading back over there again. By contrast, now he has performed poorly and his Test career is in (for the short term at least) jeopardy, suddenly he doesn't love the game anymore.
I think people who are making the 'soft' comments, granted they might not know the full picture, but they are not unreasonably joining the dots - i.e. success = he loves the game; failure = he's fallen apart.
TBH, as has sort of been touched-on already, I see this as a good thing. The more this becomes commonplace, the better the planet will be, IMO.I think, and we had this discussion at work the other day at lunch, younger people today are much softer mentally and mature much later than early generations. Perhaps it's because we leave home much later than our parents did and have children later, and generally take on much less responsibility than was the case in earlier generations. But yeah, there's a general sofness there - and hence I think, consequently, there will more of this sort of thing in the future (guys being devastated about sub par performances).
Yeah, good thoughts. Hopefully for cricket fans, its the kind of tiredness that will pass with a bit of rest and a bit of perspective - that is, hopefully after a break he'll remember the reasons why he used to like playing cricket before it became all about getting a test berth and decide that it still what is going to make him happy.The way I see it, he worked hard, got into the Test side had his chance and wasn't able to take it, thus becoming disenfranchised with the whole thing. That he's not willing at this stage to go back to square one and start the whole process again to get back in, is imo fair enough. I don't see how that makes him soft especially when you have the type of injuries he's had and will have. I don't see why he has to keep going on after such a spectacular failure. I can only sympathise with cricketers who have finally gotten their chance and the ecstasy that comes with that and then have the exact opposite feeling days later once they've failed and realise their career may not be heading in the direction they've always wanted.
You have a couple of books on cricketing suicides and it's not really a surprise that although there is a big glamor associated with the success of the sport, there is an equally ugly side associated with its failure that we don't see as often. Some people aren't able to just take the faliure on the chin and run in and bowl another thousand overs, I don't think they're soft at all.
That's a different argument though. I'm not saying that he should be hog-tied to the game of cricket and should front up no matter what. Of course he is free to do what he wants. Rather, I'm making the point that it's not unreasonable for people to question his strength of character, in terms of him being as happy as Larry when he tasted success in International cricket (as in the WC where he said he felt like jumping back on a plane to the Carribean and re-living it) but then walking away straight after he tasted his first real failure. People are joining the dots, and looking at cause and effect. I mean, I guess people are asking the question: if he bowled in the Test match like he did in the T20 in Perth and in the WC, would he now be walking away?The way I see it, he worked hard, got into the Test side had his chance and wasn't able to take it, thus becoming disenfranchised with the whole thing. That he's not willing at this stage to go back to square one and start the whole process again to get back in, is imo fair enough. I don't see how that makes him soft especially when you have the type of injuries he's had and will have. I don't see why he has to keep going on after such a spectacular failure. I can only sympathise with cricketers who have finally gotten their chance and the ecstasy that comes with that and then have the exact opposite feeling days later once they've failed and realise their career may not be heading in the direction they've always wanted.
You have a couple of books on cricketing suicides and it's not really a surprise that although there is a big glamor associated with the success of the sport, there is an equally ugly side associated with its failure that we don't see as often. Some people aren't able to just take the faliure on the chin and run in and bowl another thousand overs, I don't think they're soft at all.
Ha, haven't read the thread but for this post but i'm hoping this is not the position that the CW community is taken since thats crap. I remember the great Brian Lara doing a similar thing back in 1999 so for me what he has done is surprising but if you look at his situation with all the injury setbacks he has had its probably a fair decision on his part. But hopefully he will be back by the the Ashes next year..Rather, I'm making the point that it's not unreasonable for people to question his strength of character, in terms of him being as happy as Larry when he tasted success in International cricket (as in the WC where he said he felt like jumping back on a plane to the Carribean and re-living it) but then walking away straight after he tasted his first real failure. People are joining the dots, and looking at cause and effect. I mean, I guess people are asking the question: if he bowled in the Test match like he did in the T20 in Perth and in the WC, would he now be walking away?
.
Thats the thing though it would be fair to assume that, since thats the trend of career. He either plays & does well or is recovering from an injury so that frustrating aspect of him always being injured has probably lead to him making this decision.I agree to an extent with Goughy and Howardj.
If Tait's problems are personal, and have little to do with cricket, or at the very least little do with his success/failure in cricket, then calling him soft is probably unfair. It could be physical, family, personal etc.
But if after his first major failure (and let's be honest, it wasn't that big a failure. There have been far bigger embarassments in cricket, even in the last 2 years... Mick Lewis anyone?) at int'l level he calls it a day (of course, if what Pasag is alluding to is actually the case), then its soft. There really isn't any two ways about it. It doesn't make his decision wrong, but it is pretty soft and weak.
But its all conjecture. Maybe he has family problems, maybe its the physical toll... it could be anything. But if he had taken 5 wickets in Perth, I doubt he'd have quit.
Right, I think it's silly to question his strength of character and smacks of people thinking cricket is the only thing important in life. Just because he's not set out for the life of an international sportsman doesn't make him a 'soft ****', much the same as Marcus Trescothick. It just means that this is not for them.That's a different argument though. I'm not saying that he should be hog-tied to the game of cricket and should front up no matter what. Of course he is free to do what he wants. Rather, I'm making the point that it's not unreasonable for people to question his strength of character, in terms of him being as happy as Larry when he tasted success in International cricket (as in the WC where he said he felt like jumping back on a plane to the Carribean and re-living it) but then walking away straight after he tasted his first real failure. People are joining the dots, and looking at cause and effect. I mean, I guess people are asking the question: if he bowled in the Test match like he did in the T20 in Perth and in the WC, would he now be walking away?
As Goughy said, it's not a crime to be soft - and equally it's not a crime to point it out. As everyone has said on here, there may be more information than we know about. But people are just (not unreasonably) joining the dots and going on what they know and what they've observed.
If he was in this frame of mind before Perth though he didn't have a chance of taking 5 wickets...maybe he just got sick of playing and sick of having to fight back from injury. If you're not wanting to be there, then it really doesn't matter what else happens.I agree to an extent with Goughy and Howardj.
If Tait's problems are personal, and have little to do with cricket, or at the very least little do with his success/failure in cricket, then calling him soft is probably unfair. It could be physical, family, personal etc.
But if after his first major failure (and let's be honest, it wasn't that big a failure. There have been far bigger embarassments in cricket, even in the last 2 years... Mick Lewis anyone?) at int'l level he calls it a day (of course, if what Pasag is alluding to is actually the case), then its soft. There really isn't any two ways about it. It doesn't make his decision wrong, but it is pretty soft and weak.
But its all conjecture. Maybe he has family problems, maybe its the physical toll... it could be anything. But if he had taken 5 wickets in Perth, I doubt he'd have quit.