Shaun Tait quits cricket

[Craig]

Live-streaming webcam instead?

No comment

 

[JBH001]

Thread may have moved on a bit, but Tait shown up as a bit of a soft c*ck imo.

Maybe he does not have what it takes, and never did.

 

[adharcric]

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.

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.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

Thread may have moved on a bit, but Tait shown up as a bit of a soft c*ck imo.

Yeah, that's definately it.

 

[pasag]

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.

 

[howardj]

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.

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.

 

[Goughy]

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.

Whoa, hold your horses.

Im a soft cricketer and high maintainance and I recognise that as a weakness. Its not going to change and I have to deal with it, but it doesnt change it from being fact. Im big enough to recognise my failings and as such try and minimise them.

I dont know the exact story regarding Tait, but as I mention in my post his overall situation isnt something Id like to be a part off. I could see myself acting in a similar fashion given the summer he has had.

Now it obviously isnt as simple as Im soft ego Tait is soft. Its more to do with the fact that I admire people that exhibit qualities that I myself dont possess and wish I did.

The ability to handle public pressure and life isnt something Id be capable of doing (as such I recognise it as a personal weakness) and I admire and respect those that do so with ease.

Some people handle things better than others. There is no doubt (whatever the circumstances) that different people would have handled the situation differently. Tait has probably made the correct decision for himself. He has recognised a weakness inhimself and is doing his best to address it. Fair play to him.

Its still a weakness though as others may be better adapted to deal with it.

What world do we live in when people have no weaknesses and to say they do is insulting?

Some people are taller than others, some people faster, some people better at crosswords and some people better at handling the pressures of being an International athlete in the public eye.

There is nothing wrong with any of that, but not to be able to recognise it is touchy-feely in the extreme.

EDIT- To clarify. Ive coached a variety of sports in different places around the world with lots of people with different personalities. The key to working with such diverse groups is being able to recognise peoples attitudes and mentality. Everybody needs to be treated in a way that brings out the best in them. What works for one will not work for the next. You may think the term 'soft' is an insult but to me its an important thing to recognise in a person in order to work with them the best way possible and get the best out of them. The same way arrogance or insecurity are different personality types that require different handling.

Softness exists but in itself it isnt a problem. The bigger problem isnt recognising it or working with it. Illingworth didnt relate to the personality of Hick and it hurt Hicks career. He ignored the needs of a 'softer' cricketer as he didnt appreciate what was required.

The head in the sand attitude to 'softness' does a disservice to those that may require handling with a gentler touch and dont respond to the 'deal with it' attitude of many.

 

[pasag]

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.

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.

 

[Richard]

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).

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.

 

[Matt79]

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.

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.

 

[howardj]

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?

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.

 

[aussie]

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?
.

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..

 

[Jono]

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.

 

[aussie]

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.

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.

 

[Top_Cat]

Seriously, you guys don't know the full picture. What's being said in public isn't the full story. As I said, although a really great guy, Shaun's Dad is a cop and there was no softness in that household. Quiet, polite, helpful and nice are the Taits but definitely not soft.

Second, Shaun has had joint troubles for some time. Those of us who do fitness work are used to waking up every morning with musular pain. Eventually you get used to it and get to enjoy the recovery session which releases the muscular tension. Joint pain is another thing entirely; you don't get used to it because it's a pain deeper in the tissue than surface muscles and it doesn't go away with exercise. It's debilitating physically but mentally, it take its toll because deep down, guys who have it like Shaun know it's only going to get worse over time. It would surprise me not at all if one day Shaun woke up in a bit more pain than usual, read the paper about him being not all he was cracked up to be after the Perth Test, had State training that day and thought "Screw this."

The Perth Test was just the end of the saga. These sorts of problems have a long timeframe.

 

[pasag]

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.

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.

Poor international professional sportsman - perhaps. Soft ****, no.

I mean were do we stop? Is Gilchrist soft because he had a poor series with the gloves and decided his time was up? Hmm, what about Giles, got dropped and got some slack in the media and gave it away. He was pretty happy as well after the 05 Ashes iirc. Because he enjoyed success in the WC and doesn't want to live through all the failures after that doesn't make him soft at all in my books, it justs means he's not cut out for international cricket and its not for him and joining the dots like that is unreasonable.

 

[pasag]

I think this stems from a wider problem of players getting judged as people from the few actions you see on the sports feild - he's a **** because he appeals to much or runs around like a jerk, etc etc knee jerk stuff when no one really knows very much about the person at all. I mean the worst stuff is some of the abuse Watson and Bond get around here for just getting injured.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Still cringing at the criticism he got for apologising for making an appeal. He can do whatever the hell he wants.

 

[Richard]

An appeal for what? A wicket?

When was anyone stupid enough to criticise him for that? Bowlers do that ATT.

 

[Son Of Coco]

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.

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.