smssia0112
Chairman of Selectors
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2005
The competition has received several entries, here is a selection of the finest.
Voting will be open for exactly 10 days from today. Please vote here using the poll, and avoid criticism of any articles.
To avoid bias in voting, the names of all of the writers have not been disclosed. Furthermore, I discourage anyone for making it known that they have entered. This is completely anonymous, as is the poll. The winner will be announced at the conclusion of the competition, and others may reveal at that stage which articles they wrote.
Here are the articles. The topic for all of them was of course, Is player behaviour a serious issue in cricket today?
Voting will be open for exactly 10 days from today. Please vote here using the poll, and avoid criticism of any articles.
To avoid bias in voting, the names of all of the writers have not been disclosed. Furthermore, I discourage anyone for making it known that they have entered. This is completely anonymous, as is the poll. The winner will be announced at the conclusion of the competition, and others may reveal at that stage which articles they wrote.
Here are the articles. The topic for all of them was of course, Is player behaviour a serious issue in cricket today?
Article 1
I want to start by talking about a batsman who never walked, who shamelessly appealed to the umpires even when he knew the batsman wasn?t out and whose obsessive will to win severely ruptured relations between England and Australia. The player was, of course, WG Grace.
It?s easy to pretend that the advent of professionalism has led to an increase in unsporting-like conduct but the truth is that cricket has always been ?just not cricket?.
Let us begin by rehearsing the arguments for why the olden days were sepia-tinted. The older generation have a seemingly boundless capacity for self-delusion when it comes to this. Mssrs Boycott and Botham are notorious within the game for having opinions as consistent as weather-vanes and an infallible mechanism to compare player skill, sportsmanship and drinking ability unfavourably with their own day (although they might just be right on the last one). This mentality is wholly understandable in many ways but also wholly indefensible. There are a litany of cricket controversies ranging from arguing with umpires, bowling underarm, ball tampering, pitch invasions in protest at umpiring decisions (Sydney 1879) and players betting on matches (including Ian Botham) going back to and beyond the age which was supposedly golden.
There may be more at stake in the modern game but since public relations has also taken on a correspondingly greater role players and teams cannot afford to be seen as unsporting or as cheaters. More than at any time in the past I would say there is now a demand that teams win and win fair. Hence the gentlemen?s agreements entered into by Ganguly and Ponting at the start of the current series (something that never would have been contemplated by the good doctor). In the post-modern, over-politically correct age in which we live it?s harder and harder to get away with anything. Problems that arise from TV replays and leave a side and their supporters feeling hard down by are exacerbated by the feeling that the other team hasn?t won fair. In a game of such high stakes, professional sportsmen have a right to fair and consistent decision making ? surely the problem is that now there is a way of getting decisions right that isn?t being utilised. To return again to WG, you can bet he would have kicked up much more of a stink if he knew his instinct would be vindicated by TV replays. In many ways modern players are models of restraint and paragons of virtue.
In conclusion, player behaviour has changed very little; it?s just that players now get caught out more. Whether that suddenly makes it a serious issue or not isn?t really important as it could be solved at a stroke if cricket would drag itself kicking and screaming into the Twentieth century (not Twenty-first in cricket?s case) and actually make a commitment to getting things right. Until then we?ll just have to put up with more cries of ?in my day??. Perhaps the good Doctor might have been able to prescribe something for our nausea.
It?s easy to pretend that the advent of professionalism has led to an increase in unsporting-like conduct but the truth is that cricket has always been ?just not cricket?.
Let us begin by rehearsing the arguments for why the olden days were sepia-tinted. The older generation have a seemingly boundless capacity for self-delusion when it comes to this. Mssrs Boycott and Botham are notorious within the game for having opinions as consistent as weather-vanes and an infallible mechanism to compare player skill, sportsmanship and drinking ability unfavourably with their own day (although they might just be right on the last one). This mentality is wholly understandable in many ways but also wholly indefensible. There are a litany of cricket controversies ranging from arguing with umpires, bowling underarm, ball tampering, pitch invasions in protest at umpiring decisions (Sydney 1879) and players betting on matches (including Ian Botham) going back to and beyond the age which was supposedly golden.
There may be more at stake in the modern game but since public relations has also taken on a correspondingly greater role players and teams cannot afford to be seen as unsporting or as cheaters. More than at any time in the past I would say there is now a demand that teams win and win fair. Hence the gentlemen?s agreements entered into by Ganguly and Ponting at the start of the current series (something that never would have been contemplated by the good doctor). In the post-modern, over-politically correct age in which we live it?s harder and harder to get away with anything. Problems that arise from TV replays and leave a side and their supporters feeling hard down by are exacerbated by the feeling that the other team hasn?t won fair. In a game of such high stakes, professional sportsmen have a right to fair and consistent decision making ? surely the problem is that now there is a way of getting decisions right that isn?t being utilised. To return again to WG, you can bet he would have kicked up much more of a stink if he knew his instinct would be vindicated by TV replays. In many ways modern players are models of restraint and paragons of virtue.
In conclusion, player behaviour has changed very little; it?s just that players now get caught out more. Whether that suddenly makes it a serious issue or not isn?t really important as it could be solved at a stroke if cricket would drag itself kicking and screaming into the Twentieth century (not Twenty-first in cricket?s case) and actually make a commitment to getting things right. Until then we?ll just have to put up with more cries of ?in my day??. Perhaps the good Doctor might have been able to prescribe something for our nausea.
Article 2
How long must we put up with these boring, predictable and ultimately unappealing attempts to get a batsman out by berating the umpire every ball? The fact that these ?professionals? jumping up and down like five year olds for no good reason is hurting our great game.
If a game is decided on an umpiring decision, don?t blame the umpire, blame the gutless bowler backed by his ten back up singers shouting and jumping up and down at him at arms length away. The pressure these guys are under is extreme, sitting out there five days on end with crowds going feral. Give the guys a break and let them do their job. Its understandable to want a wicket but instead of focussing aim on the umpires how about thinking about the next ball and showing a little class.
So an appeal is unsuccessful, then what, stand and look at the umpire and curse in a language he doesn?t understand until he changes the decision. The players behaviour these days is laughable.
The bowlers are just a joke, they abuse umpires to get a bloke out, and when he?s not given out we will question the umpire?s decision. Also, if a poor bloke standing out in the field makes a mistake on their precious bowling, oh no, we will berate them too for making their pointless figures look one run worse.
The ridiculous behaviour exhibited by players in recent years is nothing short of disgraceful. It?s a massive blight on this game that is going to effect the next generation of players which will be detrimental to the game in its entirety.
If a game is decided on an umpiring decision, don?t blame the umpire, blame the gutless bowler backed by his ten back up singers shouting and jumping up and down at him at arms length away. The pressure these guys are under is extreme, sitting out there five days on end with crowds going feral. Give the guys a break and let them do their job. Its understandable to want a wicket but instead of focussing aim on the umpires how about thinking about the next ball and showing a little class.
So an appeal is unsuccessful, then what, stand and look at the umpire and curse in a language he doesn?t understand until he changes the decision. The players behaviour these days is laughable.
The bowlers are just a joke, they abuse umpires to get a bloke out, and when he?s not given out we will question the umpire?s decision. Also, if a poor bloke standing out in the field makes a mistake on their precious bowling, oh no, we will berate them too for making their pointless figures look one run worse.
The ridiculous behaviour exhibited by players in recent years is nothing short of disgraceful. It?s a massive blight on this game that is going to effect the next generation of players which will be detrimental to the game in its entirety.
Article 3
Player behaviour is a very important issue in cricket today. Cricketers are role models to people, they represent their country and their way of life and it is important that they behave. Kids watch cricketers, they love cricketers. You hear kids all the time saying things like ?Adam Gilchrist is my hero? etc. If Adam Gilchrist for instance was to use a racist comment the kid might think it is alright. The youth of our era (at least in Australia) are more disrespectful and have less manners. This may or may not be societies fault but it needs changing. Children need to have good positive role models if they are to succeed in life.
As for on field situations player behaviour is very important. It makes the game quicker, more fluent and means that it is easier on umpires and officials.
Over-appealing for example can lead to bad decisions from umpires due to the stress it puts them under. Players should try and make things as easy as possible for umpires. It is an extremely difficult job.
Sledging can be a very big matter. Some sledging is alright, the joke kind of sledging but when someone says something about a player?s wife or says a racist comment. It is out of line and should be dealt with. Personal insults are not the way to go. It is far too common and the ICC should do something about it. There is competitive and there is over-competitive. Some people go way to far.
Dissent of umpire?s decisions is okay in small doses, what you think in your mind is your own business but if your vocal or whinge/ complain about a decision this is not in the spirit of the game. You have to take the good from the bad. Umpires are only human. Hawkeye and technology like that that the third umpires and commentators have at their disposal is not 100% correct. So how can you expect an umpire to make a split second decision after only seeing thing a situation for a few seconds to be 100% correct everytime. Players should be more courteous to umpires and give them the respect they deserve. This will then get kids who play cricket to do the same. Too often I see players in my cricket team and opposing cricket teams not walk of or complain for hours about decisions, especially when half the time they were wrong.
As for on field situations player behaviour is very important. It makes the game quicker, more fluent and means that it is easier on umpires and officials.
Over-appealing for example can lead to bad decisions from umpires due to the stress it puts them under. Players should try and make things as easy as possible for umpires. It is an extremely difficult job.
Sledging can be a very big matter. Some sledging is alright, the joke kind of sledging but when someone says something about a player?s wife or says a racist comment. It is out of line and should be dealt with. Personal insults are not the way to go. It is far too common and the ICC should do something about it. There is competitive and there is over-competitive. Some people go way to far.
Dissent of umpire?s decisions is okay in small doses, what you think in your mind is your own business but if your vocal or whinge/ complain about a decision this is not in the spirit of the game. You have to take the good from the bad. Umpires are only human. Hawkeye and technology like that that the third umpires and commentators have at their disposal is not 100% correct. So how can you expect an umpire to make a split second decision after only seeing thing a situation for a few seconds to be 100% correct everytime. Players should be more courteous to umpires and give them the respect they deserve. This will then get kids who play cricket to do the same. Too often I see players in my cricket team and opposing cricket teams not walk of or complain for hours about decisions, especially when half the time they were wrong.
Article 4
With the recent events in Australia there has been renewed focus on the behaviour of cricket players, however the scrutiny of the behaviour of players is more often than not, unwarranted. The things that are described as ?bad behaviour? or ?against the spirit of cricket?, aren?t.
The major concerns of over-appealing, dissent and sledging all come from the mental side of cricket. Much of it comes from the extreme determination to win, something that is the lifeblood of competitive sport, when there is no passion by the players there is no passion from the supporters. A player that is giving his all in a game of cricket becomes emotionally involved in the game, every decision by the umpires affects them, that is why they appeal so vigorously, that is why they are disappointed to get out, that is why they are happy for wrong calls to be given.
The rest comes from frustration, the determination not to lose, the bowlers try to get at the batsman mentally, that is why the over appealing and sledging happens, if you can get a batsman out mentally, you get them out on the scoreboard. It isn?t a one sided affair, if anything they give back more than they get to attempt to get the edge over the opponent.
Having these things in cricket show that players are passionate and that they are determined to win. Nowhere is this more so than in test matches, playing for your country is the ultimate achievement, losing for your country is the greatest disappointment. The players know they have to put their all in to get the win, the fans expect it.
However sometimes this all goes too far, players need to contain their emotions, especially towards umpires, who are unfairly the target of huge amounts of criticism. If a player shows the other team that they are affected by the appealing and sledging, or alternately a wrong decision or missed chance, they lose out. If they are unmoved they succeed.
The line is drawn at racial or personal attacks; there is a difference between being passionate and being offensive. When things become personal, the good nature of cricket goes away and this is where problems occur. If someone resorts to these attacks, it shows they are frustrated, in most cases they won?t mean what they say, however it is still undesirable.
There isn?t the catastrophe that some see, all the fuss is over a few incidents of the line being overstepped, the game isn?t in crisis, the players have seen what happens when the line is crossed and they don?t like what resulted. The game is better for it.
The major concerns of over-appealing, dissent and sledging all come from the mental side of cricket. Much of it comes from the extreme determination to win, something that is the lifeblood of competitive sport, when there is no passion by the players there is no passion from the supporters. A player that is giving his all in a game of cricket becomes emotionally involved in the game, every decision by the umpires affects them, that is why they appeal so vigorously, that is why they are disappointed to get out, that is why they are happy for wrong calls to be given.
The rest comes from frustration, the determination not to lose, the bowlers try to get at the batsman mentally, that is why the over appealing and sledging happens, if you can get a batsman out mentally, you get them out on the scoreboard. It isn?t a one sided affair, if anything they give back more than they get to attempt to get the edge over the opponent.
Having these things in cricket show that players are passionate and that they are determined to win. Nowhere is this more so than in test matches, playing for your country is the ultimate achievement, losing for your country is the greatest disappointment. The players know they have to put their all in to get the win, the fans expect it.
However sometimes this all goes too far, players need to contain their emotions, especially towards umpires, who are unfairly the target of huge amounts of criticism. If a player shows the other team that they are affected by the appealing and sledging, or alternately a wrong decision or missed chance, they lose out. If they are unmoved they succeed.
The line is drawn at racial or personal attacks; there is a difference between being passionate and being offensive. When things become personal, the good nature of cricket goes away and this is where problems occur. If someone resorts to these attacks, it shows they are frustrated, in most cases they won?t mean what they say, however it is still undesirable.
There isn?t the catastrophe that some see, all the fuss is over a few incidents of the line being overstepped, the game isn?t in crisis, the players have seen what happens when the line is crossed and they don?t like what resulted. The game is better for it.
Article 5
Talk about player behavior these last few weeks have been busy, but the question is where did it start , well it all started from poor Umpiring decisions from Symonds nick and to the Stumping of Symonds, you could say that burst the Indians bubbles. What might have bothered the Indians even more was the fact that Ricky Ponting gave Ganguly out, but was it really Pontings fault that Ganguly had to go or was it the Umpires decision , the Umpire alone gives the player out not the players. The point I am coming to is that shouldn?t Umpires that control of the game before player behavior gets out of hand? Umpires shouldn?t even allow the players to talk to each other unless it?s something like ?well done ? or ? good ball? . Then you also got the question as to why the players bad mouth each other, well it?s fairly simple and the average cricket player should know that, it?s to try and get the batsman to lose his concentration, then you might also ask what if the batsman bad mouths the bowler or Insults the bowler , well it hardly ever is that batsman who starts it. Cricket is a game of skill and also a game that works with your mind bad mouthing each other surely is unsportsman like. Umpires should know that they should take immediate action before accusions like racism is brought into the game. Players also shouldn?t be banned for Racism if the is no prove ( Harbajan Singh ) but the other question is why would the other side make such an accusion I mean surely they should have respect, honesty, and they should be friendly, cricket is a gentleman?s game. We?ve heard that saying so many times but International players hardly ever live up to that. Bowlers run up with aggression the batsman plays a straight drive or a block and the bowler picks it the ball up and throws it at the batsman?s stumps, is it necessary. Sledging can ruin a players career it could make the player feel embarrassed every time he walks on the field. Sledging could get the player banned for a couple of games forcing the side to pick some other player and then suddenly that player makes a century or gets a five-for , and then suddenly the banned player doesn?t get another chance for sometime or never gets a chance.
If you ask me the question , is player behavior serious? Ill say hell yes!
Voting closes in 10 days' time, so get voting. Feel free to discuss the articles in here, but once again, try not to be critical of others, and don't reveal your identity that you've entered or that your article is whatever number.
If you ask me the question , is player behavior serious? Ill say hell yes!
Voting closes in 10 days' time, so get voting. Feel free to discuss the articles in here, but once again, try not to be critical of others, and don't reveal your identity that you've entered or that your article is whatever number.
