Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket
-
@barbarian that's the key point isn't it?
Australians abhor a loser. It's what makes you punch above your weight in so many different sports, your ingrained national psyche to always fucking win, and to ignore those who lose.
And cricket is the soul of the country. And this country has come to expect, with very good reason over the past 30 years, a successful cricket side.
We've heard the "spirit of cricket" thing before. And it lasts as long as the results do. As you say, if the loses start against India (of all fucking teams) then the drums are going to beat, and the leashes will be off. Snarling fast bowlers might be the most iconic Aussie sporting icon. Muzzled ones will only last as long as the wickets do.
And that's not a criticism by the way, it's an observation.
-
oh, and i saw a couple of articles this morning bemoaning the way South Africa set up the game. Warnie had a whinge of course.
You're 1-up in the series, and you are carrying two injured bowlers, no skipper in his right mind is going to dangle a carrot.
-
@mariner4life said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
We've heard the "spirit of cricket" thing before. And it lasts as long as the results do. As you say, if the loses start against India (of all fucking teams) then the drums are going to beat, and the leashes will be off. Snarling fast bowlers might be the most iconic Aussie sporting icon. Muzzled ones will only last as long as the wickets do.
True. I think defining 'the line' would be a good start.
But the problems run much deeper. In Australia, cricket just isn't a game where you have a beer and a laugh with the opposition after a game. Not at club level, not at district level, not at any level. It's the polar opposite to rugby in that regard.
The toughness, the sledging, the hard edge is bred in at a very young age. So expecting people to turn away from it when they get to the pinnacle of the game is completely misguided.
Any changes have to be broad and systemic, touching all parts of the game.
-
@barbarian said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
The team now stands at an interesting crossroads. This article from today sums it up, in part.
The 'no sledging' approach is all well and good, but fundamentally it's prohibition and doomed to fail. As Elgar points out, at some point a tired fast bowler is just going to crack.
As has been discussed earlier on this thread, a bit of chat on the field is part of the game and to take a vow of silence is a bit ridiculous.
So do they define what they can and can't say? Obviously personal abuse is out of the question, but what about pointing out flaws in the batsman's technique? Or pointing out a certain bowler has dismissed him the past six times they have played?
While some may see that as 'sledging', I'd wager it's the type of chat every side employs - even those legendary nice guy Kiwis.
But the rubber will hit the road when they start losing. A home series loss to India is on the cards, and I'm not sure how well it will be taken if we go down 4-0 while our players heartily applaud Virat Kohli as he raises his bat yet again.
I actually think it will be pretty easy to find that line. Just imagine the stump-mic is on the whole time. (as it sometimes is). Don't start guerilla-advertising to point out that the broadcaster is supposed to turn it down so that you can run your mouth off. Instead sledge in a way that will be acceptable if picked up by the mic.
So don't threaten to break someones arm or comment on the attractiveness of female family members.
Do talk about, put doubt in the batsmen's head about technique, conversion rates, bravery, pitch conditions, fatigue etc
-
@rapido said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
I actually think it will be pretty easy to find that line. Just imagine the stump-mic is on the whole time. (as it sometimes is). Don't start guerilla-advertising to point out that the broadcaster is supposed to turn it down so that you can run your mouth off. Instead sledge in a way that will be acceptable if picked up by the mic.
So don't threaten to break someones arm or comment on the attractiveness of female family members.
Do talk about, put doubt in the batsmen's head about technique, conversion rates, bravery, pitch conditions, fatigue etc
I think it's easy in theory, but there are still grey areas. And 'acceptable' sledging is very hard to define.
Just one example - are players allowed to swear? Maybe not in the context of 'shit shot you fkn cnt', but what about an exasperated 'fuck' from a tired fast bowler if an edge flies through the slips?
-
If I were in charge, I'd give umpires far greater power to police on-field behaviour.
One of the reason problems like this don't happen in rugby is because of effective refereeing. If there's a bit of niggle in the game and things are about to kick off, a good ref will take aside both captains and try and calm the situation.
In cricket that rarely happens. The umpires are there to count to six, give the occasional LBW and that's about it.
I can't help but think that a stronger on-field disciplinary system could have prevented a number of ugly incidents before they even happened (eg the actions of both Warner and Rabada).
Maybe that means bringing in a yellow-card system, or taking 5 runs off an offending side while the game is in play. I'd suggest that would be a far greater penalty than the current fines based on match fees.
-
@barbarian said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Just one example - are players allowed to swear? Maybe not in the context of 'shit shot you fkn cnt', but what about an exasperated 'fuck' from a tired fast bowler if an edge flies through the slips?
Take a leaf from Rugby. The odd 'fark' from a bowler is OK, but you don't see anyone in Rugby running in to f-bomb opposition.
Also, just re-read the Sprit of Cricket. It's pretty clear - don't direct abusive language towards an opponent or umpire. So, get in their head, talk about them, but just don't directly abuse them. There will be a 'line' somewhere, but it sure as shit will be a long way away from where the Aussie team drew it previously.
-
@barbarian said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@rapido said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
I actually think it will be pretty easy to find that line. Just imagine the stump-mic is on the whole time. (as it sometimes is). Don't start guerilla-advertising to point out that the broadcaster is supposed to turn it down so that you can run your mouth off. Instead sledge in a way that will be acceptable if picked up by the mic.
So don't threaten to break someones arm or comment on the attractiveness of female family members.
Do talk about, put doubt in the batsmen's head about technique, conversion rates, bravery, pitch conditions, fatigue etc
I think it's easy in theory, but there are still grey areas. And 'acceptable' sledging is very hard to define.
Just one example - are players allowed to swear? Maybe not in the context of 'shit shot you fkn cnt', but what about an exasperated 'fuck' from a tired fast bowler if an edge flies through the slips?
The mic is already on when edges are flying. No change needed there. Players already self regulate and are much more restrained than park cricketers.
I think it is pretty easy, if they're deliberately testing the stump mic then I think they know the line already.
I don't want a sterile Aussie cricket team. Go hard I say, but without any nasty personal stuff you want hidden from the mic. They probably managed to do that successfully for a 140 years.
But like the NZ v Pak test when Phil Hughes died, I would expect the weird 'how are we supposed to behave?' phase will pass quickly. Australia will revert to verbals, sledging. And that's fine. They'll just need to work out where the line is.
-
@rocky-rockbottom said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
dont mind me, just a little art project of mine, coming through...
You could fill that with hundreds of pictures of Aus politicians. Those fuckers put actors to shame with their ridiculous crocodile tears.
-
-
-
@kiwimurph said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Australia absolutely destroyed in the first session to lose by 492 runs. Phillander on fire.
We now go ahead of the Aussies in the rankings apparently.
-
@kiwimurph said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
Australia absolutely destroyed in the first session to lose by 492 runs. Phillander on fire.
"Injured"
-
-
@sidbarret its good to see a chippy Saffer on here. You sorted your shit out after a very ordinary showing in the first test, and reaped the rewards of some good cricket.
Let's hope Rabada's brain explosions are kept to a minimum in future OR that he manages to set a record for most number of reports before actually being banned! That would be a sight to see.
-
@nta said in Convicts v Marxist Land Thieves - Crucket:
@sidbarret its good to see a chippy Saffer on here. You sorted your shit out after a very ordinary showing in the first test, and reaped the rewards of some good cricket.
Let's hope Rabada's brain explosions are kept to a minimum in future OR that he manages to set a record for most number of reports before actually being banned! That would be a sight to see.
You mean they sorted their shit out after Australia stopped using sandpaper to polish the ball?
Im sure Rabada is a good bloke off the field and knows where the line is.
This is fun.
-
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=12025434
I don't think this is even rock bottom. Now the tour is over the media will focus on the players' appeal of the CA sentences, and Davey will contemplate how much money he can get by nuking his ties to CA and lifting the lid on matters inside the team. Cricket Oz are getting their just desserts. You raise this guy to be your attack dog, you encourage him to be that guy then when you kneecap him and try to make him the scapegoat for the entire fiasco he turns on you instead of quietly disappearing. What did they think would happen?
