What happened to Australia?

[Jono]

Goughy you directly brought looks into it.

Of course no one is going to disagree on you with attitude and confidence etc.

But if a player has freckles and wears glasses, they can still be awesome players.

[social]

Originally Posted by Goughy

Not so much to do with the play or success but to do with what the players look like and their attitude. Growing up, Australian cricketers looked and acted like men against boys. Physically intimidating and possessing of fabled mental toughness, they looked a different breed to the boyish Englishmen.

What happened in Australia? Genuine question, has there been a pussification of the nation?

This generation seems very different in both look and outlook to the previous couple. It doesn’t appear to be just about ability.

Waugh had the, oft described, 'gunslinger eyes', Boon and Border wouldn't back down from a tidal wave, Merv Hughes scared batsmen so much that they ignored the fact he bowled at 75 mph, Langer looked like a man ready to go over the top to bayonet the Hun, Hayden was built like the Hulk, Warne had the career building arrogance that overwhelmed weaker opponents, McGrath shot pigs for fun, and Dean Jones was willing to watch himself waste away to an early death in the pursuit of runs. I could go on.

Now there are fragile fast bowlers that retire or flounce (Tait and Johnson), Clarke looks like a 12 yr old boy or an anorexic lesbian, Watson is scared of ghosts, Bollinger has his own image issues, Hughes looks like a trainee school teacher and the straw that broke the donkeys back was watching Smith come out to bat today.

He looked like Billy Bunter without the glasses. Possibly the least intimidating thing I’ve seen on a cricket field in quite a while.

Certainly the players are not as good as before but they have lost their edge especially when playing against guys like Tremlett who Brumby correctly describes as looking like a big, intimidating unit.

I’m not having a go at Australia as I have long admired their attitude, determination and how that is all packaged together. Now it seems the only reason to share a drink with them would be to see their glamorous other halves.

Are there greater changes at work in Australian life and *s******s* culture to have made such a change in attitude, aggression and, dare I say it, manliness? What happened?

My comments are as an outsider looking in and I am genuinely interested if forces are at play or whether this isn't what it may appear.

Australia still leads the world in many areas and on a per capita basis, there is little doubt that between ourselves and our friends over the ditch, we are still by far, the greatest sporting nations on earth

However, in all honesty, with regards to the cricket team, I reckon it comes down to two things - leadership (or should I say, "lack thereof) and the natural cycle of sporting excellence

In relation to the former, I've long been of the opinion (which I've shared with you guys ad nauseam) that Australian cricket is rotting from the head down and now the chickens are coming firmly home to roost.

You simply cannot **** things up as consistently as these jokers have (whether it be selection, man management, sacrificing performance in the chase for filthy lucre, etc) without it coming back to bite you on the arse

I also dont think that Ponting is doing his job as a leader on the field as I would bet my bottom dollar that a Steve Waugh, Allan Border or Mark Taylor would have made a significant contribution in either Adelaide or at Perth today that would've pulled us out of a hole

However, the main thing is that the players arent that good atm and anyone that disputes it is really being blind to the obvious

That will change as certain guys gain more experience and the underachievers are discarded but the new breed's job will be harder unless fundamental changes take place within the team's and CA hierarchy

[sledger]

Originally Posted by Jono

Goughy you directly brought looks into it.

Of course no one is going to disagree on you with attitude and confidence etc.

But if a player has freckles and wears glasses, they can still be awesome players.

You speak of these things as if they are mutually exclusive to one another, when in reality looks, attitude and confidence are all quite closely knit imo. I'm not suggesting that anyone's looks have any impact whatsoever in terms of their pure ability to master a certain skill set, but it may have a considerable influence on how one might apply oneself to a particular task etc... Though not strictly related to cricket, it's probably no coincidence that the people in the world who get the most successful or well paid jobs are those who are well turned out and have a certain presence. Presence is not something you can practice as such for mine, it's something you develop through your own confidence, which in turn is impacted upon massively by your image, how you perceive yourself and how you are perceived by others. As I say, it's not likely to have any impact whatsoever on your own ability per se (and I don't think Goughy was ever actually suggesting it was btw), but how you come across to others can drastically influence your success, and that can be said in any context, not just a sporting one.

[Marcuss]

Opinions on Ian Bell? Blonde hair, freckles, well spoken, only ever used to score runs when the going was easy. bit of a wet flannel and a softcock etc etc.
Over the last year or so though he's posted up some really impressive numbers... people see him any differently yet?
Personally think the making of him was being dropped in the West Indies

[G.I.Joe]

Originally Posted by andyc

Haha, is this the 'muscular cricket' theory all over again?

There appear to be traces of the 'aura theory' too. Its the 'muscular + aura theory'.
Or if you will, the 'mascara theory'.[/Dr Tobias Funke, analrapist]

[vcs]

I think it's a pretty textbook case of confusing cause and effect.

[tooextracool]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Opinions on Ian Bell? Blonde hair, freckles, well spoken, only ever used to score runs when the going was easy. bit of a wet flannel and a softcock etc etc.
Over the last year or so though he's posted up some really impressive numbers... people see him any differently yet?
Personally think the making of him was being dropped in the West Indies

No because the idea that Bell is a 'softcock' has always been something of a fallacy and a make believe story. He played some impressive knocks under pressure in Pakistan and Sri Lanka early in his career.

Has my opinion on Bell changed? No, not until he starts racking up centuries. Not proven yet IMO. And it wont change if he scores a pretty 70 odd in this inning at Perth.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Goughy

Looks, attitude and presence play a huge role in success.

I have watched England teams with an unhealthy proportion of nice looking boys present zero intimidation to the 'scary' West Indians and the 'tough looking' Aussies. Looks cannot be downplayed. Even if it doesnt effect your own game (though some mongrel goes a long way) it impacts how others deal with you and play against you.

Mate, Anderson, Cook and Broad are a Mardi Gras organiser's dream. They'd be put on the first float to head up the parade were they available.

[Burgey]

Originally Posted by Marcuss

Opinions on Ian Bell? Blonde hair, freckles, well spoken, only ever used to score runs when the going was easy. bit of a wet flannel and a softcock etc etc.
Over the last year or so though he's posted up some really impressive numbers... people see him any differently yet?
Personally think the making of him was being dropped in the West Indies

Oh ****, how did I forget Bell?

Has the "scared altar boy" look all to himself.

Plays a lovely cover drive though.

[Tom 1972]

Great fast bowlers hate batsmen. Every one of 'em.

I'm sorry but small quicks like Waqar and Marshall WERE scary. You just had to see the white line fever in their eyes.

[Neil Pickup]

Originally Posted by sledger

You speak of these things as if they are mutually exclusive to one another, when in reality looks, attitude and confidence are all quite closely knit imo. I'm not suggesting that anyone's looks have any impact whatsoever in terms of their pure ability to master a certain skill set, but it may have a considerable influence on how one might apply oneself to a particular task etc... Though not strictly related to cricket, it's probably no coincidence that the people in the world who get the most successful or well paid jobs are those who are well turned out and have a certain presence. Presence is not something you can practice as such for mine, it's something you develop through your own confidence, which in turn is impacted upon massively by your image, how you perceive yourself and how you are perceived by others. As I say, it's not likely to have any impact whatsoever on your own ability per se (and I don't think Goughy was ever actually suggesting it was btw), but how you come across to others can drastically influence your success, and that can be said in any context, not just a sporting one.

This is it. Presence, atmosphere, body language. Call it what you will, but non verbal communication has a lot to count for in contests. The England football team falls into the same box.

A huge amount of winning or losing a classroom happens way outside the words you utter. It's the difference between hoping the child will do what you want them to, and knowing that they're going to follow instructions because they know you're boss.

[Jacknife]

Originally Posted by Burgey

Mate, Anderson, Cook and Broad are a Mardi Gras organiser's dream. They'd be put on the first float to head up the parade were they available.

Did they knock you back when you asked

[zaremba]

Originally Posted by Goughy

For ****s sake, do people read the thread? There is more than 1 way to intimidate. It isnt just how you look.

Genuinely puzzled by where this thread is going, given where it started. Are we talking about looks (see OP) or not? Are we talking about ability (see Don Bradman but not the OP) or not?

Anyhow in the interests of balance I'd like us all to remember how dear old Kim Hughes looked, and the sheer dripping metrosexuality of his tears

[Redbacks]

Aftermath of the Sydney test v India

CA faltered like wimps, the Australian media went in for the kill and even suggested that we over celebrated breaking the test world record.

Since then

W16 L12 D8

with only 4 of those wins against decent teams in RSA and Eng. Could also just be that we are ****!

[Ausage]

Originally Posted by Redbacks

Aftermath of the Sydney test v India

CA faltered like wimps, the Australian media went in for the kill and even suggested that we over celebrated breaking the test world record.

Since then

W16 L12 D8

with only 4 of those wins against decent teams in RSA and Eng. Could also just be that we are ****!

This.

What a ridiculous thread. When Australia is tough, uncompromising and sweeping all opponents before them you can't hear a word for the weeping of inferior cricketing nations claiming we're taking the game too seriously. Then our great players disappear, we fall (way) back in the pack and all of a sudden we're metrosexual nancies not worth sharing a beer with. Why are people so obsessed with the attitude and now ****ing LOOKS of our team? People say Australians have tall poppy syndrome, but I've seen nothing to suggest the rest of the world doesn't have it in equal amounts.

We're just **** now. When you're playing **** your attitude and confidence look ****. Ask the February 2009 incarnations of Graeme Smith and Jaques Kallis if Mitchell Johnson was a flouncing ponce. He put Smith out of action for months and nearly broke Kallis jaw.

Never mind we were within moments of selecting a man (the guy's got a shiner on his cricinfo pic ffs) with the most manly name ever concieved in the history of mankind, and England have only recently lost a player who would look more at home in a Twilight novel. Wanna try convince me Jimmy Anderson and Ian Bell look tough? Go on, give it a try.

Love some of your contributions Goughy. This one? Nahhhhh.