Michael Jeh
An Australian tragicomedy
There's politicking, buffoonery, strange plot twists, and little heed to the big picture
Michael Jeh
24-Jul-2013
One of the great advantages about being an opinion-piece writer is that you invariably have the luxury of a few days to digest events, read the commentary pieces, match reports, press conferences, post-mortems and sage observations before cobbling those odd fellows together in an attempt at a polarising article that may drive contrary opinions.
The recent Lord's Test has provided plenty of grist for the mill. Jarrod Kimber's piece was so dry it parched my throat on the way down, while Brydon Coverdale put the icing on that cake with a perspective that was so plain-speaking that I had to do more research to ascertain whether it was superb satire or the saddest truth of all. Brilliant writers though they may be, they have been unintentionally sidelined by Cricket Australia's own PR machine and the ubiquitous sibling of David Warner, both of whom deserve special mentions for timing and delivery when it comes to Twitter and twits.
Fresh from those comic episodes was the tearful exit of James Pattinson from the series, a far cry from the bullish statements he made prior to the series opener when he took aim at the way English fans treated his brother Darren when he played a solitary Test for England. Whilst Pattinson junior's actual bowling was less threatening than his demeanour, the tragi-comic irony is that his loss will probably be felt more keenly in the batting department. Likewise Ashton Agar - if he could only take a wicket or two on spinning pitches, the search for that elusive allrounder may be over. Throw in Mickey Arthur's legal challenges, Ricky Ponting's bemusement at Cricket Australia's timing, and Pat Howard's repeated assurances that all is well in the trenches and it's hard to know which angle to focus on.
Full postDon't blame the DRS
The review system has been a convenient scapegoat in the Trent Bridge Test, but it has done all it was supposed to
Michael Jeh
15-Jul-2013
"Controversial DRS decision robs Australia at the death". Headlines like this, presumably written by sub-editors working for the popular news media and parroted by news readers who don't know the difference between DRS, LBW and RPO have the potential to give me IBS. If nothing else, they clearly highlight the dearth of genuine cricket writers (and sports editors) in mainstream Australian media, following the absorbing Test at Trent Bridge.
Too many journalists these days have come through an education system that values appearance over substance, covering a number of different sports with equal mediocrity, trying too hard to find analogies and wordplay when a mere description of what actually happened would be more than adequate. Given that the reader/listener/viewer is likely to be more knowledgeable about the sport than the person delivering it, less is more. Please.
The ABC apart, long renowned for its sober and measured style of reporting the facts, most of the commercial media I have consumed in the last 24 hours have been characterised by hyperbole and cheap headlines. Even before the match was finished, the usually excellent Patrick Smith, writing in the Australian, allowed himself to be sucked into the hype surrounding the Stuart Broad incident by referring to it as "a wallop to first slip". If a writer of his calibre can succumb to the temptation of rhetoric before research, what hope do the young cadets who got their diploma from a cornflakes packet have?
Full postIs there a different moral code for batsmen?
Why do we judge a player who nicks it and stands his ground differently from one who claims a bump catch?
Michael Jeh
13-Jul-2013
The immediate public reaction to the Stuart Broad caught-behind incident overnight was predictable. Many of my cricket friends that I've spoken to, cricketers who have played a high standard of grade cricket in Australia, are nonplussed by the fuss being generated by the popular media, presumably driven by the sentiments of the public, many of whom have never played cricket at a high enough level to understand that mistakes of this nature are part and parcel of the game.
From those who have played the game to any significant extent, the reaction was that it was no big deal. Umpires make mistakes, even howlers. Batsmen are perfectly entitled to stand their ground, fielders are entitled to show instinctive disbelief and disappointment, and the game moves on. The very "Australian-ness" of the moment was not lost on any of the folk I canvassed this morning. It is a widely accepted truism that Australia has always been slower to embrace the notion of "walking", happy enough to take the good with the bad.
Peter Siddle said as much in his excellent post-match interview. In his laconic, laidback style, he made it clear that the Australian team had accepted that they had got the rough end of the pineapple, but that it was part and parcel of modern cricket. A few journalists tried to make mountains out of molehills but the burly Victorian wasn't taking the bait. The spirit-of-cricket rubbish was thrown up in the air and Siddle calmly defused that grenade by pointing to the fact that the Australians just got on with the game and were unable to dismiss Broad by the end of play. Their immediate disappointment, disbelief and frustration were as instinctive as they were understandable. From the highlights reel that I saw, it did not appear that Australia lingered too long in the aftermath. Fair play to all concerned.
Full postA knife in the back
Cricket Australia's decision to sack Mickey Arthur after having supported him in disciplining and rotating players betrays the management's muddled thinking
Michael Jeh
08-Jul-2013
One foreign coach dumped (Mickey Arthur) and another looking nervously over his shoulder (Robbie Deans, Australia's Kiwi rugby coach).
One British triumph sewn up with the Lions in three weeks but the longest ten-Test series in my living memory is about to start. A relatively stable England camp and anything but stability for the Australians.
It will be interesting to see whether injuries, form, suspensions and team rotations will do anything to alter this picture by the time we get to Sydney in early 2014. Both teams will know each other intimately by then, so the last few Tests are likely to be a battle of attrition rather than an ambush mugging. The series in England will be interrupted briefly and both the teams will make their way to Brisbane, and any bragging rights from round one in Old Blighty will be short-lived. Whoever wins the series in England will not have the luxury of savouring that pleasure for too long, mindful that that the final battle in Sydney will be when the victor truly gets to enjoy the spoils of a long war.
Full postArthur the victim of a revolution?
Talk is, his disciplinarian style was a bit too much for some players to stomach
Michael Jeh
24-Jun-2013
The danger in trying to cover a breaking story when it is actually in the process of breaking is that hindsight can later make a fool of you. Nonetheless, accustomed as I am to boldly venturing where angels fear to tread, I write this piece at 12 noon Australian time on Monday, 24 June, working on what little information I have, and a bit of inside knowledge that may later prove to be less than 100% accurate. It would be too easy (and safe) to wait until all the facts are known, but half the fun in writing an opinion piece is to spin the dice and see if those gut instincts are correct.
I refer, of course, to the story about Mickey Arthur being dumped as Australia coach, at the beginning of an Ashes campaign that is fast unravelling for Australia. Surely this could not have been a planned succession strategy, so one can only presume that something dramatic has occurred overnight to precipitate this tumultuous course of events. If I had to guess at a cause, I would lean towards Arthur losing the support of some key figures in the inner sanctum, most probably Michael Clarke or the CEO himself, James Sutherland. It might have come from sustained pressure from any number of players who felt disgruntled by Arthur's old-fashioned man-management style, but it's hard to believe that their disenchantment alone could led to a coup unless they have now converted management or the captain to join their ranks.
When the real reasons emerge, if they ever do, it will be interesting to see if Arthur reveals a sense of betrayal, considering senior management backed his strong disciplinary stance, only to cave in to "player power". Australian sport is not immune to those sorts of pressures and one cannot discount the force of dissent from within the ranks. The ACT Brumbies, a rugby franchise based in Canberra, famously dumped their coach after his relationship with the senior players became untenable. WA Cricket recently parted ways with their young coach, Lachlan Stevens, as decent a chap as ever there was, after his attempts to forge a culture of accountability and discipline did not sit easily with some senior players and management/board members who had the most to lose from having their boat rocked. The fact that the squad was beset with discipline issues around senior players like the Marsh brothers, Luke Pomersbach and Marcus North did not stop management from siding with players when push came to shove. So don't discount the power of the dressing room in unseating the general.
Full postWhen team selection meets broadcast economics
Nine's multi-million dollar broadcast deal was unlikely to have been agreed to unless there were some "understandings" about concerns over TV audience numbers
Michael Jeh
20-Jun-2013
This story was but a few hours old when I penned my instinctive reaction to the news that Channel Nine will apparently have some role to play in influencing the selection of Australia's cricket team under the new broadcast deal agreed to last week.
On the surface, it appears almost incredible that a senior executive of a TV network would be bold enough to make that claim in public but once the initial shock has passed, I think we'll have to grudgingly applaud him for his honesty.
Predictably, Cricket Australia was quick to reject the suggestion that selections would be made by anyone but the selectors, but Channel Nine have probably achieved everything they wanted to achieve in a strategic sense just by putting the story out there and giving it some oxygen. In a big-picture sense, I doubt that Channel Nine would seriously have expected anyone to believe that they would have a serious role to play in individual selections; I suspect they merely wanted to make the point that the overall team selections need to be more closely aligned to playing the best available XI, mindful of injuries but with less emphasis on the rotation policy aimed at preventing fatigue/injuries.
Full postThe satisfaction of watching Karthik and Dhawan succeed
For one who spotted their talent nine years ago and got them over to Australia on a scholarship stint, it's thrilling to see such global cricketers rise to stardom
Michael Jeh
12-Jun-2013
Sometimes writing a feel-good piece that has no particular agenda is an indulgence worth savouring, especially in the middle of a cut-throat tournament. I had one of those indulgent moments today watching Shikhar Dhawan and Dinesh Karthik finish off the job in style against West Indies.
Back in 2004, I was lucky enough to captain a cricket tour to India and Sri Lanka (a trade mission organised by the Queensland government), and one of the great privileges of that trip was to identify two young players who we thought showed immense potential and to offer them a short scholarship stint at the Centre of Excellence in Brisbane (formerly Cricket Academy).
On the day we arrived in Chennai, I happened to switch on the hotel television and saw a young Karthik batting in a domestic final, sweeping his way to an impressive century. His slick glovework was no less impressive and I remember saying to Allan Border (who was also on the tour as an ambassador) that we may have found our first scholarship candidate without even playing against him. AB, with his vast experience, nodded sagely, and there was the first candidate sorted before a ball had been bowled!
Full postHow education can prevent corruption in sports
Cricket is an easy target for illegal practices, and a lot of that is to do with how much of the game there is these days
Michael Jeh
05-Jun-2013
On Wednesday, I was one of the guest speakers at a conference aimed at addressing corruption issues in sport. At the start of proceedings, we joked that Australia getting bowled out for 65 could have been ammunition for anyone with a conspiracy theory; yet it's just one of those things that happen in sport. Sometimes, strange things can happen and there need not be anything sinister about it. It doesn't matter which country is involved.
An Indian colleague from Mumbai teased me about whether there would be any bleating about this pitch turning too much and we all enjoyed a good laugh about the fact that it was the seamers who did the damage this time. No excuses except that it was a practice match and perhaps not too much could be read into it except a slight dent to the confidence perhaps. George Bailey's refreshingly honest post-match assessment put it into perspective without making excuses. There's a lot to like about his leadership - I suspect we'll get used to it if Michael Clarke's back is as bad as it appears. I don't expect to see much of Clarke during the Champions Trophy or the Ashes.
Speaking of Ashes selections, it is fascinating to watch politicians dog-whistling about issues around refugees and promises to "turn the boats back", in reference to the so-called influx of boats carrying refugees. The front pages of the newspapers are full of predictable interviews about threats to national security. It's an easy tune to play with an election looming; the contentious issue of border protection and offshore immigration centres will prove too tempting for politicians looking for easy votes by insisting that we make refugees wait years before their refugee status is assessed. Yet the speed with which Fawad Ahmed's citizenship has been rushed through parliament might be conveniently forgotten by those very same politicians if he plays a key role in winning the Ashes. Clearly we have a soft spot for refugees if they can give the ball a rip!
Full postLeadership looks a distant dream for Warner
Picking a fight over an issue the Australian public doesn't really care about, that too with journalists of considerable repute, isn't going to help Warner in the long run
Michael Jeh
20-May-2013
The way the David Warner Twitter controversy has panned out is so typical of the medium itself. Said today, irrelevant tomorrow, potentially remembered forever. For young athletes, especially those as instinctive and immature as Warner, a mobile phone or laptop computer should come with a time-delay switch or warning instructions - "Press 'send' only after long period of thought. The ramifications could be leadership-threatening."
For anyone who knows anything about the domestic cricket scene, the prospect of Warner being touted as a future captain of Australia was always going to elicit a gulp of apprehension. A close friend of mine who has played grade cricket for nigh on 30 years and is as fair-dinkum Aussie as they come had this to say yesterday when he drove past and interrupted my Sunday lawn-mowing chores: "If Warner is ever made captain of Australia, I'll renounce my citizenship immediately."
Interestingly enough, it was not Warner's explosive (and unpredictable) batting style that elicited this response. Affectionately called "Box", my mate is renowned throughout Brisbane grade cricket for regularly hitting the first ball of the game for six. If Warner was cloned off anyone, Box was the prototype for Warner-esque batting long before it became popular. The negative response was probably more to do with the notion that the highest sporting office in the land requires a man who is more often than not the best player in the team and almost always the elder statesman. Despite Warner's immense talents, it requires a leap of faith too far to imagine him growing into that role. Some perceptions are hard to shake, made harder by repeated indiscretions and the lack of signs that mistakes are being learned from.
Full postAustralian cricket's single voice
New administrative reforms mean the board is more equally representative of the states, and that there is an admirable new focus on the health of the national game
Michael Jeh
09-May-2013
"All men are created equal. It is only men themselves who place themselves above equality."
-- David Allan Coe
-- David Allan Coe
A good friend of mine, Professor Patrick Weller, a learned and wise man, once wrote a book called First Among Equals. I have long pondered that clever title, long after I forgot the content of the book itself. In recent times, thinking about the changing landscape that is Australian cricket, it strikes me that it has always been thus: first among equals. Until now perhaps.
The recent imbroglio over Tim May, the ICC, and the perceived influence of the BCCI is a perfect case in point. There is no doubt that some countries believe that India's influence in the ICC has got to the point where they, India, are clearly first among equals. While this may or may not be true, it must be remembered that it wasn't that long ago that some other nations were running cricket's agenda, and they clearly had no issue with being "equal but more equal" than the other members. Two wrongs don't make a right, of course, so it will be interesting to see how this diplomatic game plays out. Not all votes are equal; never have been.
Full post