Dog Day Afternoon

Have you ever had a dog that you got de-sexed? You thought it was the right thing to do, because he’d occasionally piss on the rug or try to bang the neighbour’s Chihuahua. But after the operation he just wasn’t the same. He didn’t strut around the park in the same manner. He didn’t bark as much, didn’t wag his tail as vigorously, or chase the tennis ball as hard. The spring in his step was gone. He looked like the same dog but he seemed different. And he was. He had his balls cut off. And really, how could any of us expect to be the same?

The Australian cricket team has for almost 20 years now, somehow managed to remain virtually unchallenged as the sports unofficial (and official) kings. To use a popular football term, there has never been a ‘rebuilding’ phase with Australian cricket. And the thing that has separated them from the rest of the world, and indeed the difference between very good sports people and elite sports people, goes beyond physical talents.

It is mentality. It is confidence. It is belief. It is toughness. It is all those things that happen between the ears, not between the stumps. That is what has given them that edge, what has made them the clear cut no. 1 team in the world: The line between confidence and arrogance is often said to be as narrow as certain parts of a bee’s anatomy, but that fine line is (or was) Australia’s edge.

For others, that line is apparently fluid, moving accordingly so as to position themselves on the side that most favours them at the time; the side that gets them on the front page, or takes the heat off their insipid play; or racist taunts.

Amongst all this posturing, and people lining up to bemoan the lack of ‘decency’ in the game, somehow India’s literal “we’ll take our bat and ball and go home” routine was forgotten. Now, I don’t know about you, but from about 6 years of age, I was taught this was the worst possible type of a dummy spit: It was the whinge of the perpetual loser. I was also taught not to give people a hard time about being different.

Andrew Symonds was called a ‘monkey’. Brad Hogg called the Indian team ‘bastards’. One of these terms is racially offensive. The other is offensive only if you were born before running water was common place. I understand there are cultural differences to be considered, but the ICC has strict guidelines on racial abuse. I’m not too sure what their stance is on pre-industrial revolution insults about the marital status of one’s mother at the time of their birth.

India eventually dropped the “racist” charge against Brad Hogg and was widely applauded. It was called a ‘sporting gesture’ and something done in ‘good faith’ and lots other things that failed to mention the guideline under which Hogg was cited in the first place. No-one suggests that they may also have done so to encourage Australia to pick Hogg, and therefore duck Shaun Tait.

By this point, however, the media train, fuelled by its own cannibalistic measures, was completely out of control and being driven by long forgotten sportsmen offering uninformed, unsolicited opinion (Deeks? Really? Did Deeks need to get involved?) and a self-serving British ex-pat who may, or may not, be a paedophile (check into Roebuck’s history with English schoolboy cricket teams).

The Aussies were unsure of themselves in Perth. The bowling and field placing lacked imagination and aggression. The pressure, the thing that mental toughness allows you to place on the opposition, was lacking to the point that world cricket’s most confident team, looked distracted and desperately unsure of themselves.

The media, and PC apologists trying desperately to appease an Indian team guilty of all the things they accused Australia of, took away the one thing the Australia cricket team was undoubtedly the best at in the world; winning the match in their own minds before a ball ever gets bowled.

I hope these same people took careful note of the first two test matches. I hope they remember the vigour with which the team played all day long. I hope they accurately recall the inspiring moments out they kept producing out of seemingly hopeless situations. And I hope they gave them one last scratch behind the ear, because although it looks like the same dog, it isn’t.

Do Your Job



There was no one particular incident (apart, perhaps, from losing an unlosable position) that the Indian team should feel particularly aggrieved about. Correspondingly, this seeming protest of theirs is not in response to any one thing, but rather a series of small events that, if taken as singular occurrences, happen in every test match. It is rare that these events all occurred in the same match, but as a bumper sticker once informed me, shit happens.

Everyone needs to take a deep breath and calm the fuck down. I realise there’s a lot going on. And I realize that there are a lot of bad columns being written by a lot of lazy journalists. But let’s all relax before Peter Roebuck demands that the British Empire come back and reinforce Colonial rule: We are currently in this position because Ricky Ponting is good at his job.

First of all, this may be stating the obvious, but there would not be this kind of media over-reaction had India been able to bat out 72 fucking overs instead of crumbling like an 8 year-old block of cheese in the meaty hands of Ian Hewitson: It’s only ever the losing side that complains.

Secondly, Ian Chappell might actually be right; animosity between sides begins with poor officiating. All the awful, awful decisions have got to rest squarely on the indecisive shoulders of Mark Benson and Steve Bucknor. (BTW: When did Bucknor morph into Morgan Freeman? - “I wish I could tell you that Andy Symonds fought the good fight, and the Indians let him be. I wish I could tell you that - but cricket is no fairy-tale world.”)

The Australian’s are not particularly nasty, nor do they play outside the rules. They are competitors and they have a mental toughness other countries lacks. They refuse to concede anything. They think they can beat anyone and they usually do. And they don’t mind sharing this fact with the opposition. Their history breeds confidence and vice-versa. They are positive, aggressive and over the past 15 years have single-handedly reinvented test cricket.

However, sometimes this can result in situations where the Australian captain is telling batsmen they’re out, which is not his job. And this is unfortunate, even though, a) he was right on this occasion and b) the umpires weren’t doing their job. But it doesn’t look great.

Anil Kumble took this and accused Australia of not playing within ‘the spirit of the game’, but there is a particularly apt saying about the inhabitants of glass houses. And there is difference between sledging and racial taunting.

The Indian’s appear confused about their defence; team officials argued the term “monkey” is not racially insulting in their country, while Harbhajan and Tendulkar deny the word was even said. Regardless, if, as the Indian’s claim, that calling Andrew Symonds “monkey” is not racially motivated, why would this name be (again) directed at Australia’s only black player?

The threat to quit the tour reeks of contradiction and sour grapes. The Indians want umpires, but only the ones who will give them favourable decisions. They want to play within the spirit of the game, but with their racially abusive off-spinner and their stalling tactics. And, most of all, they want someone to blame after having Australia reeling at 6/140 and losing the match.

Ricky Ponting’s job is to win cricket matches, not conduct international diplomacy. If the Indians had done their job, we’d be heading to Perth with a great series tied at 1-1. If the umpires had done their job we wouldn’t have noticed them at all. And if the ICC had done their job, Harbhajan, instead of threatening to leave Australia, wouldn’t have been allowed to tour in the first place.

Let’s get some job descriptions out to Perth, before it’s too late.