Poms due for a wash, whitewash that is.
Poms due for a wash, whitewash that is.
Cook plusses as captain
- he performs with the bat
- he doesn't panic with field settings and plays the percentages (I am commenting from multiple series as opposed to just this one)
- he is intelligent
- he is not a natural leader. When interviewed by his highness Mark Nicholas he said that his favourite part of being captain was making decisions and being a part of the decision making group. A leader would have talked about his team and working with individuals to get the best out of them. In time when he has more experience he will come to value that the most and his answer will change.
Overall he is a keeper. England got to where they are through a pick and stick policy and they can't let this series lead to an over reaction of changes,
I got great enjoyment shouting "WHY THE **** ISN'T THIS GAME BEING PLAYED AT THE BASIN?!>!?!?" to reasonably significant cheers from the sparse crowdOverrated XI Warner, Burns, Steve Smith, Rahane, Bairstow, Alecz Day, Donovan Grobelaar, Luke Ronchi, Faulkner, Dan Christian, Permaulone day NZ will bring chappell to his knees in a puddle of his own tears and you'll see Phlegm on his belly greedily tasting every delicious tear before watching the hope fade from that old ****s eyes.
Standards for our own mob are implicitly sky high, both of what is expected, and what is possible. Glenn McGrath's talk of 5-0 is not really hot air, which is no doubt puzzling or crazy to a lot of people, but it's bewildering in the same sense that Australians don't grasp gallows humour, as Swanny pointed out recently.
It is assumed that you will bite and scratch and execute your skills. It is assumed that you will 'do' - AFL Hawthorn COACH JOHN KENNEDY SNR DO SOMETHING DO - YouTube
That is ingrained in the culture. But that's the key - doing - specifically how you do something. Michael Clarke making stacks of runs doesn't mean much when he has frosted tips and doesn't appear to buy into the culture or have a feral edge about him. He isn't a national hero for bringing the Ashes back, he's a national hero for threatening James Anderson and crushing an opponent with exactly the ferocity and brand of cricket people want to see. For showing a mongrel side. A hard edge. And for cutting an opponent with an inflated sense of position in this sport down to size. After all these years, we finally accept him. Not 2 odd years ago crowds were booing him around the country. We didn't like the way he appeared to go about things, and we weren't sure what sort of bloke he was.
There's a particular tall poppy sentiment towards English sides over the years because of the perceived soft underbelly. The perceived lack of dig-in, filthy fight and grit, to deliver when **** isn't going your way. The 2005 Ashes side is defined down here by how they backed up in 2006. It's all well and good to do it in England when McGrath steps on a ball, and there's nothing to lose and everything to gain, adrenaline pumping - but how do they front up when the pressure and spotlight are on, they're out of their comfort zone and they have to back up, against a side and nation out for blood. Cue the Harmison wide ball.
It's about what's behind the eyes. Who are you inside really, how do you win, are you a good winner, is there any mongrel about you; winning alone won't go close to garnering respect from the fans here. If you're really good, you better be a really good bloke too, you better not show off, and you better be someone of true character, or people will be rooting for you to fail. Nobody likes a ****ing showoff, and the one thing people want to see more than a victory is a pretender exposed and brought back to the pack by a pack of good honest battlers. Ugly and coarse it may be, others will say the right balance of it drives egalitarianism and brings the fair go for all bull**** into play and all that. I've always been on the fence about it.
If you get too good, you attract tall poppy attention regardless. Loads, and I mean loads of Australians didn't like the "great" Aussie cricket team, and actively supported against them. They're cocky, they're arrogant, they don't respect their opposition etc etc.. It wasn't a unified public behind them - you probably noticed this over the years.
Weird lot, that's for sure. Tall poppy is one of the strangest cultural phenomena on this planet imo.
Last edited by 3703; 30-12-2013 at 03:42 AM.
That really is an excellent post.........quality stuff 3703!!
R.I.P Craigos, you were a champion bloke. One of the best
R.I.P Fardin 'Bob' Qayyumi
Member of the Church of the Holy Glenn McGrath
"How about you do something contstructive in this forum for once and not fill the forum with ****. You offer nothing." - theegyptian.
"There's more chance of SoC making a good post than Smith averaging 99.95." - Furball
"**** you're such a **** poster." - Furball
We celebrate our wins. But it is extremely entertaining when given the chance to take the piss out of the Poms.
And generally speaking I think the tall poppy syndrome that has been talked about comes from people with no idea about the sport the person they're trying to cut down is involved in. People still say now Clarke shouldn't be in the team and or captain. And that's after he's scored a billion runs in the last couple of years and proven he's an excellent captain. Totally clueless.
Last edited by Son Of Coco; 30-12-2013 at 04:30 AM.
The public had far more dislike for the Australian team of 2012-2013 which was losing and had Twatto and others failing than the great Australian team. I'd never seen so many people dislike the Australian team as they did earlier this year, sometime after the loss to South Africa and the ongoings in India (homework gate, Twatto captaining etc.)
"I am very happy and it will allow me to have lot more rice."
Eoin Morgan on being given a rice cooker for being Man of the Match in a Dhaka Premier Division game.
Thing is, which Aussie side over the years displayed those supposed required characteristics? Most Aussie teams I can remember or have a historical perspective of are arrogant and disrespectful of the opposition. That seems to be the norm, not being 'a good bloke' at all.
The sort of general malaise that only the genius possess and the insane lament.
Even Australia didn't persist with **** bowlers like Beer, Doherty, Agar, etc. England have, with someone as horribly pedestrian as Tim Bresnan for almost three years and that alone is reason sufficient for them to deserve to lose. You know that feeling you got from the old Australian sides, especially when they were batting, that they didn't particularly rank the opposition? It's back, at least against England, and I'm not sure it's going away anytime soon. You can pick Hughes and Khawaja to play against this rabble and they'll get going too.
There is absolutely nothing for England to take away from this series. No, not even Stokes. He's an honest cricketer and that's it. Root has technical issues and the old guard is past its sell-by. Darker days ahead.
There's no need for such in depth analysis. Australians like to win and take the piss out of the opposition in the process. It's all a bit of fun and certainly started when I was playing sport as a little kid.
Yeah sure, there's a few odd apples out there who cry 'arrogance' but they are in the great minority.
To say we don't appreciate our players doing well is absolute horse****. Some people just don't know much about cricket. Pretty simple stuff.
"He's [Michael Clarke] on Twitter saying sorry for not walking? Mate if he did that in our side there'd be hell to play. AB would chuck his Twitter box off the balcony or whatever it is. Sorry for not walking? Jesus Christ man."RIP CraigosKnowledge is knowing a tomato is a fruit. Wisdom is knowing not to put it into a fruit salad
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)