Wives and Kids on Tour

[howardj]

There was an article in the newspapers here in Australia this morning, suggesting that the issue of players' wives and children may have been detrimental to Australia's recent Ashes campaign. One player - probably Andrew Symonds - lamented at one stage in the tour that "there are fourteen other players on tour, but I can't find anyone to have a beer with".

My view about families on cricket tours is that there is no problem, as long as cricket is the number one priority, and that time together as a team is not compromised. I think it gets damaging when families view any time that the players are not playing, training or travelling, as 'family time'. A team has got to have bonding time away from the game, and must gel together as a unit. This can't be done by just playing and training together.

 

[luckyeddie]

Ah, well. Any port in a storm, I suppose.

Why am I not surprised that a press every bit as 'patriotic' (fickle, biased yet unable to face up to reality) as ours should have to use that as an excuse?

 

[Top_Cat]

It's pathetic. Blaming a loss, when you're outplayed, on being too comfortable because family is present is really stretching it. I mean, they've blamed previous losses on being homesick so now they get what they want, they're too comfortable? Pfft, whatever. I didn't enjoy losing the Ashes but geez, if there's one thing I cannot stand, it's not giving credit where it's due; England deserved their Ashes win and even an Aussie side with perfect preparation, everything going their way, etc. would have been beaten by this English side.

In fact, I clearly remember several former English players moaning that the late scheduling of the Tests meant the Aussies had a significant advantage because of better weather, firmer pitches, etc. I mean, I thought it was a dubious claim at the time but strangely, you don't hear of that much now.........

 

[SquidAU]

In fact, I clearly remember several former English players moaning that the late scheduling of the Tests meant the Aussies had a significant advantage because of better weather, firmer pitches, etc. I mean, I thought it was a dubious claim at the time but strangely, you don't hear of that much now.........

Fat lot of good it did us anyways! Rained too damn much as it was, although the scoreline could have been worse, I guess.

Bah, it was all hogwash in the papers to make the Aussie team feel superior!

As for the families thing, thats a load of crap. Never affected the last time the Ashes tour was on, and any other tour in the last decade or so....

 

[Dasa]

This is a non-issue IMO. Whether the players have their families on tour or not shouldn't affect their form...and I'd like to have my family around if I was on tour for a large part of the year, so it seems to me they'd be more affected if the family wasn't around.

 

[Jono]

No need to really bring it up in my view. Its just rubbish built up by the media.

 

[Slow Love™]

LOL, it's all a bit silly, and I think McGrath said as much - and if the experienced, successful Aussie team that arrived for the Ashes wasn't sufficiently "bonded" as an outfit, I don't know what could have possibly been done. The only downfall of having the family on tour is that it might get in the way of a bit of uphill gardening and/or some fine British crumpet. Admittedly, I can understand that particular objection, at least.

BTW, I love the disturbing anecdote about Border's '85 ashes tour. Even funnier if you imagine it read by "whispering" Robert Gottliebson of the BRW:

"Border had witnessed several unsettling incidents on the 1985 Ashes tour where, it was once reported, one batsman was seen walking his baby daughter in the foyer at daybreak when he was required to bat in a Test a few hours later."

 

[SteveG]

Absolute rubbish...we're talking about professional athletes here. To use family as a scapegoat for Australia's loss is pathetic. We were beaten by an energetic, talented and focused team of cricketers.

We on the other hand seemed to be waiting for England's good form to crash because we were 'unbeatable'...it didn't happen, and we got what we deserved. Beaten by a better team.

If a player doesn't want to leave his family for that period of time, then he should make himself unavailable for the tour. You are playing for your country, it should be your focus.

Obviously, if something happened to a family member while you were on tour then you would be excused to return home...no problem.

 

[Deja moo]

Look at it this way; if the others were available to go drinking, Symonds wouldnt have had to get stoned all alone without someone to have some control on him, then he'd have played against Bangladesh, and if Australia hadnt lost that game, its possible that they might have done better in the rest of the tour. Plus havent there been football managers who have absolutely forbidden ***ual activity before games because it apparently affects their performance the next day ?

 

[age_master]

Not having families on tours that long would be way to hard on Family, i think its fantastic that the families are allowed on tours

 

[Top_Cat]

Look at it this way; if the others were available to go drinking, Symonds wouldnt have had to get stoned all alone without someone to have some control on him, then he'd have played against Bangladesh, and if Australia hadnt lost that game, its possible that they might have done better in the rest of the tour. Plus havent there been football managers who have absolutely forbidden ***ual activity before games because it apparently affects their performance the next day ?

Are we talking about adults or kids here? If Symonds can't go out before the start of his side's first ODI of the summer and NOT control himself, well it wouldn't have mattered who was was him. I mean, sheesh some people sure are apologetic about the behaviour of these guys. They are professional athletes who live in a fishbowl, etc. but they are still professional AND adults! If anyone else turned up to work drunk, they'd lose their jobs. Why do we not expect the same standard of behaviour from athletes? It's always mystified me.

The family thing is similar; if these guys aren't professional enough to not let their families get in the way, well what would they be professional enough for. As it stands, I believe they actually were but were beaten by a better side. Simple.

 

[Deja moo]

Are we talking about adults or kids here? If Symonds can't go out before the start of his side's first ODI of the summer and NOT control himself, well it wouldn't have mattered who was was him. I mean, sheesh some people sure are apologetic about the behaviour of these guys. They are professional athletes who live in a fishbowl, etc. but they are still professional AND adults! If anyone else turned up to work drunk, they'd lose their jobs. Why do we not expect the same standard of behaviour from athletes? It's always mystified me.

The family thing is similar; if these guys aren't professional enough to not let their families get in the way, well what would they be professional enough for. As it stands, I believe they actually were but were beaten by a better side. Simple.

Cool it TC :O . the Symonds bit was tongue in cheek. But I do think the second part has some credence...

 

[Top_Cat]

Cool it TC :O . the Symonds bit was tongue in cheek. But I do think the second part has some credence...

I wasn't really aiming my post at you. Just people who seem to believe that professional sportsmen should be given graces no-one else in a professional environment would.

 

[luckyeddie]

Plus havent there been football managers who have absolutely forbidden ***ual activity before games because it apparently affects their performance the next day ?

Only the truly stupid ones.

 

[Kweek]

Well the Dutch team dont have there wive and kids around(they can but have to pay that themselves) and look how crap we are!

haha anyway. I reckon it HAS NOTHING to do with it. to be fair I even reckon they are more confidant with them being around. although when my family watches im sooo nervous!
although at times thats a good thing.

 

[steds]

Well the Dutch team dont have there wive and kids around(they can but have to pay that themselves)

Their wives are prostitutes?

 

[Kweek]

Their wives are prostitutes?

no, you fool! airfair, hotel.

 

[Sanz]

no, you fool! airfair, hotel.

 

[Tom Halsey]

Their wives are prostitutes?

Quality. Uphill gardening was mentioned earlier. First time I've heard that in a while.

 

[luckyeddie]

Quality. Uphill gardening was mentioned earlier. First time I've heard that in a while.

Don't knock it until you've tried it.

If your garden is on the side of a hill and you wish to start at the lower end and continue in an upward direction (See? I didn't say "start at the bottom") it has its advantages. Especially if it's raining and the river is rising, yet you are committed to getting another row of bedding plants in.

That's what you meant, isn't it?