Posted by   on (March 12, 2013, 3:23 GMT) - Featured comment

It's a tough position for Michael Clarke for sure. Not only has he been in career best form but also is, in my opinion, the best tactical captain in the game at the moment. With all that, he is currently surrounded by a team that lacks experience, performance and now, commitment. Losses such as those of Pattinson will have an impact on the side no doubt, but Clarke has to take the right road and assert authority when rules are not followed. The fact is, Australia need to work that much harder due to conditions being foreign to them, and having a team that is inexperienced and lacking in the ability of more recent Australian sides. The way to still extract the best out of that is by attitude and preparation. If any players can't bring that level of commitment, they simply can't be part of the winning equation. Hats off for a brave call by the Aust team management. And to PPD123's point, India should still beware and not let this incident make them overconfident.

This is another nail in the coffin for sport being fun and about having a good time for the players as well as spectators. I agree competitive sportsmen are paid exorbitant amounts of money to play a game and accordingly standards and discipline must be maintained (disastrous performances should also be critically analysed). However by suspending players over what Clarke described as "minor disciplinary incidents" does not only hurt his team, but the sport in general. The viewing public want to see the best Australian team in terms of cricketing skill, not a team that can detail reflective accounts on how they can improve themselves. Punish them financially and keep it in house and don't punish the entertainment of the game... We want to see Johnson, Khawaja, Pattinson and Watson play... not the b-team...

Posted by   on (March 11, 2013, 19:14 GMT) - Featured comment

I think discipline is a big part of cricket. Some players are not being picked to play the test matches and i think Khawaja has not played so far and he is not showing a good attitude to persuade Clarke to pick him. The whole squad is talented in their own way but you must show your determination and resilience that you want to play for Australia. Even if you are already playing, the coach can drop you for the next map so you should not take it lightly that you are already in the team and you think no-one else in the squad is good enough to replace you. This type of lack in discipline is dis-respecting our game. I admit that Khawaja has not played a test so far however i am sure he has been watching the matches so he can contribute by saying how other team members can improve in their technique or at least spot the flaw in the team. I support this decision by Clarke and Arthur because this will encourage future players to not repeat this type of lack in discipline.

There are a lot of posters who either haven't read or haven't understood Clarke's statement. He made it clear that this was not an isolated incident but part of a bigger picture.

Many countries have had problems with players over team issues. England recently had the KP affair, NZ have Jesse Ryder, Pakistan and SA have had players banned for betting activities and so on. Australia itself has had previous issues- those who say this wouldn't have happened under Ponting should think back to 2009 when Andrew Symonds was disciplined for turning up late and hung-over.

Standards must be set and if players don't meet them consequences must follow, otherwise what's the point of setting standads in the first place? Arthur and Clarke must and will be judged on their results. If they succeed, then they have done it right. If not, someone else will be appointed- though who could possibly replace Clarke at the moment is a difficult question.

Posted by   on (March 11, 2013, 17:43 GMT) - Featured comment

Cricket - especially Test cricket - is about so much more than runs and wickets. If it was just about the stats you could just compare the averages of two opposing sides and count up to see who would win. In the modern era it's about preparation, commitment, mental fortitude, desire, single-mindedness, teamwork, and all the other factors that individually seem trivial but taken together determine the difference between bad, good and great.

So while former Aussie players are all expressing their outrage they're totally missing the point. The coach and the captain set the rules and if you simply can't be bothered to follow them then you don't play. It's that simple.

I'm English but I'm totally behind what Michael Clarke and Mickey Arthur are doing. You just can't have people who either aren't pulling their weight or think the rules don't apply to them. Clarke is right to say it's not about the homework: it's about 'do you want to play for Australia?'

I think this can be debated both ways - When you argue it from the players side, it looks like a very harsh decision. Ask some former players (Someone like Ganguly may not have made his debut, if he was born in Aus) & they will feel it very harsh to axe players from the squad for this sort of "indiscipline". Cant see this working for the subcontinental teams. From a team mgmt perspective, it is about getting everyone in line with expectation. Contrary to what people may believe,this incident could either make or break this team. This could galvanize the remaining players to work their socks off & get a positive result or the players could just go their ways and fall apart. Mohali will be a test of character for this group.It will be interesting to see how this team goes. Finally a word of caution for team India - BEWARE. History is filled with instances where players/teams have performed incredible feats when pushed to the brink. Ind should continue to prepare well & stay focussed.