***Official*** Australia in South Africa 2018

[AndyZaltzHair]

Apparently Starc and Hazlewood are part of the leadership group, and were unhappy to be mentioned by Smith

just speculation though atm

some other news reported otherwise that they were not part

 

[Spikey]

They're part of the leadership group but weren't involved in the discussion

 

[Spark]

Interesting to read in The Australian that senior Australian cricket figures where unhappy to be implicated in Smith referring to the 'leadership group' as being responsible for the incident as opposed to it being apparently just him and Warner of the side.

Him passing the buck like that may actually do him more damage in the eyes of his teammates than the incident itself as it showed under pressure he wasn't able to take responsibility; even in the unlikely event that Smith wasn't sacked as captain perhaps his teammates don't want him in the role anymore.

I mean, there really is no way he can be captain even if you could mount a case that losing the captaincy would be harsh. Would have no authority or respect in the role.

 

[anil1405]

What's with this "leadership group" anyway? Did it exist before this test? If yes, what's the point in having a leadership group? I mean wouldn't it be a barrier between senior and junior players in team? Wouldn't the leadership group undermine the role of coaching staff and the captain himself?

 

[howardj]

They're part of the leadership group but weren't involved in the discussion

Correct that's what I meant by saying they were reportedly unhappy with Smith (when he said that the leadership group - of which they are apparently a part of - made the decision)

 

[quincywagstaff]

Re: Oz's 'leadership group', Gideon Haigh in the Oz today mentioned how it can lead to a cliquey, insular culture of conformity and Yes men.

He referred to how Glenn Maxwell is obviously seen and treated as an outsider by the 'leadership group' and how they publicly blasted him and fined him for his wanting to bat higher up the Vic batting order comments. He also made some implicit comments that was why Renshaw was on the outer, because he was too 'self-involved'.

Agree on the pointlessness of a leadership group in a team of 11; isn't the VC, coach and captain already there to fill this role? Just seems to be creating hierarchy and power for the sake of it and one that has become exploited.

 

[Spark]

Leaderships are far from a unique thing in sport, right? They're probably just trying to copy over concepts that they feel work in other spots, I wouldn't say there's any nefarious intent behind its existence.

 

[Spark]

What's with this "leadership group" anyway? Did it exist before this test? If yes, what's the point in having a leadership group? I mean wouldn't it be a barrier between senior and junior players in team? Wouldn't the leadership group undermine the role of coaching staff and the captain himself?

To an extent, but I think it's just trying to formalise the idea of "senior player" and take some of the workload off the captain's shoulders, and make it clear that just because you don't a (c) next to your name, you still have to fulfill similar demands as to your performance and conduct. I think most teams around the world would have similar - England certainly do.

 

[silentstriker]

I feel bad for Smith. If everyone had just denied it, the player who did it would have gotten a one match ban and pretty soon it'd be forgotten. He did the right thing and didn't throw the rookie under the bus and now he's ****ed.

 

[EggsOnToast]

So if we take what Smith has meant previously to be "leadership group", and assume the reports are true that Starc and Haze weren't there, it would suggest the conversation was between Smith, Warner and Lyon.

The frustrating thing is that this inquiry with CA and Iain Roy is just a backroom attempt to remove as many heads as possible from the chopping block and mitigate PR fallout. I doubt we'll find out how deep it really goes.

 

[silentstriker]

To an extent, but I think it's just trying to formalise the idea of "senior player" and take some of the workload off the captain's shoulders, and make it clear that just because you don't a (c) next to your name, you still have to fulfill similar demands as to your performance and conduct. I think most teams around the world would have similar - England certainly do.

Yeah but you have a team of 11. Having anything formal like that creates an unnecessary hierarchy. Obviously you have senior players that you should rely on for help, ideas, etc but having something formal in a setting like that I think does more harm than good. As other aussies in the past have mentioned, it used to be just the captain, vice captain, and the coach. That doesn't mean you can't delegate responsibilities to other players. But I do think it has the potential to create a cliquish culture.

 

[Spark]

Yeah but you have a team of 11. Having anything formal like that creates an unnecessary hierarchy. Obvously you have senior players that II should rely on for help, ideas, etc but having something formal in a setting like that I think does more harm than good. As other aussies in the past have mentioned, it used to be just the captain, vice captain, and the coach. That doesn't mean you can't delegate responsibilities to other players. But I do think it has the potential to create a cliquish culture.

Oh yeah but it's not an Australian innovation, it's more a modern "team theory" thing. They've popped up pretty much universally over the last decade or so.

 

[Spark]

So if we take what Smith has meant previously to be "leadership group", and assume the reports are true that Starc and Haze weren't there, it would suggest the conversation was between Smith, Warner and Lyon.

The frustrating thing is that this inquiry with CA and Iain Roy is just a backroom attempt to remove as many heads as possible from the chopping block and mitigate PR fallout. I doubt we'll find out how deep it really goes.

Doesn't Lyon have form wrt surreptitious pitch roughing or something like that? For whatever reason his involvement in this wouldn't surprise me.

 

[silentstriker]

Sounds corporate. Nonsense psychobabble in the absence of empiric evidence.

 

[howardj]

I feel bad for Smith. If everyone had just denied it, the player who did it would have gotten a one match ban and pretty soon it'd be forgotten. He did the right thing and didn't throw the rookie under the bus and now he's ****ed.

Yes, I think it was because it was a fringe player Smith felt bad about him taking the fall

So confessed it was a group idea which was work-shopped (heck probably the lolly incidents by other teams are too) which is what has generated the outrage

 

[Spark]

Sounds corporate. Nonsense psychobabble in the absence of empiric evidence.

Yeah pretty much

 

[Johnners]

Sounds corporate. Nonsense psychobabble in the absence of empiric evidence.

Awta

Seems entirely unneccesary as well in a team of 11.

 

[Chrish]

Yes, I think it was because it was a fringe player Smith felt bad about him taking the fall

Or may be Bancroft might have refused to be made scapegoat alone and forced others to confess? We will never know.

Either way they didn’t have choice in this case.

 

[EggsOnToast]

Or may be Bancroft might have refused to be made scapegoat alone and forced others to confess? We will never know.

Either way they didn’t have choice in this case.

That's quite within the realm of possibility. If you are capable of sending the new guy out to cheat for you, it's not a stretch to think you would then ask him to take one for the team if he got caught.

 

[S.Kennedy]

''Leadership group''. I'm guessing the New South Wales fraternity of Smith (obviously), Warner (OBVIOUSLY), Starc, Hazlewood and Lyon. Most of the trouble with this Aussie set-up has emanated from Smith, Warner and Lyon especially (Lyon has become a thoroughly nasty man since his new found fame). Starc and Hazlewood are gigantic sledgers. Also there is the fact that Bancroft was preparing their ball for reverse.

Bancroft was co-opted into their scheme.

I think Cummins (who seems like a decent lad) is absolved. The fact Paine was made captain speaks volumes so he is blameless. Khawaja does not seem the type so I think he is not involved. Not sure about the two Marshes but I'll take a punt on them being outside this group (apparently Mitch was told to ''piss off'' by Starc-Hazlewood when he tried to sit with them on a bus!).

Yip, I'm going with Smith, Warner, Lyon, Hazlewood and Starc. Removing them and Lehman would be removing a cancer from Australian cricket.