The teams made a pact to take word of the fielder which aus didnt first and then india followed.
Fine. They made a mistake there. The 'pact' should never have been introduced in the first place.
The whole symonds/singh racial slur was just pathetic, if monkey gets symonds upset then that will do me.
What are you trying to suggest? That racial vilification is acceptable? Remember, it's not about whether it offends you, it is about whether it offends Andrew Symonds. I have about as much right as you do to categorically say that a certain racial slur is offensive or not offensive to someone completely different from me - i.e: none.
What makes Harbhajan's conduct even more unsightly is that he
knew the word 'monkey' offended Symonds. Apparently, Symonds had requested that he not use the word during the ODI series in India.
Michael Clarke not to walk when it was clear he was out was just the worst thing Ive ever seen.
Granted, that did look bad. Not quite as bad, though, as Dinesh Karthik's 'classic spit' in Adelaide.
Ive hated the aussie way of sledging, Mcgrath started giving batman a gob full, then lee and now guys like johnson and clark doing it.
Glenn McGrath did sledge, undeniably. However, he should not be used to describe the current Australian team, as he is no longer in the side. Also, prove that Mitchell Johnson and Stuart Clark have been sledging. Neither have been known for it. If you can't prove it, you're simply libelling them.
FWIW, I don't think that sledging is necessarily a positive thing, but at least we don't cross the line into racial villification without escaping serious punishment (just ask Darren Lehmann, who was suspended over five years ago).
Win at all costs.......is a perfect way to discribe Australian cricket, never mind nobody turns up because you win, as long as you win everyone is happy.
They're paid to do a job...that job is to
win matches. Obviously, they should win them without indulging in poor conduct, but that objective should be secondary. If these guys don't do that 'job', they get 'sacked'. That breeds the mentality that you describe. In fact, every cricket team ultimately follows that ethos (despite assertions to the contrary).
Besides, do you really want a regression back to the mid-1980's, when Allan Border's 'nice guys' were losing the vast majority of the matches on offer?
Do you honestly think Australia winning 2 WC's without loosing a game, destroying england 5-0, basically winning everything is good for cricket.
Actually, cricket
needs a dominant team. Without a dominant team, there is no benchmark for the other teams to overhaul. Overhauling the benchmark (like we eventually did against the West Indies after years of build-up) would improve the standard of cricket, as other cricket teams wisen up to the dominant team's strategies.
IMO, you have a clear case of 'tall poppy syndrome'. That's another aspect of Australia that I despise. We should cherish the majority of victories by the Australian team, rather than denigrate them when they commit the slightest indiscretions.
India winning 20/20 was fantastic for cricket.
Not really. It's led to the giant cash-cows and slog-fests that are the ICL and IPL, respectively, along with the greater proliferation of the 20/20 games.
Here is what I wrote some time ago:
"I don't think that Twenty20 is boring, per se, although it is certainly a wasteful sport, which promotes slogging, Hollywood-esque glamour (witness some of the personalities involved with the IPL, for instance) and fleeting entertainment, resulting in every game becoming as homogenous as the last."
At least in ODI's and Test's, there's more room for technique (not to mention more memorable moments).
The game isnt in a good way at the moment, and the dominance of Australia has a big part to do with it.
I agree that the game isn't in a good way. However, I still feel that the BCCI and ICC (with the former's domineering hyper-capitalist ways and the latter's blatant amorality and incompetence) have a lot more to do with the game's ailing health than the Australian cricket team.
