The Surfer
Victoria coach Greg Shipperd has revealed Keath will be offered an unprecedented three-year senior contract worth at least $150,000 with the promise of future domestic and international riches to come if he eschews an AFL career. Keath, 18, has already been nominated by Gold Coast Football Club under special dispensation rules giving the club access to the best junior footballers in the country.
After Mickey Arthur vacated the South African coaching post, Ryan Hoffmann looks at the likely replacements in the Mail & Guardian
When news of Arthur's departure first broke, Wessels was the first name being bandied about as a possible replacement. The former Proteas skipper has a no-nonsense reputation and is not afraid to voice his opinions, most notably on Graeme Smith's early days as captain of the national team. He has not had a great deal of success as a coach, both at English county Northamptonshire or in the Indian Premier League, but his technical knowledge of the game makes him a serious contender for the job.
Smith committed the horror sin of accepting the captaincy at the age of 22, taking over from the much-loved Shaun Pollock. Mothers wanted their daughters to marry Polly, fathers wanted their sons to bowl like him; then came along this young, brash fellow who took the world head on, dated a super model and was not afraid of confrontation. Smith is resented because he seems so sure of himself, because he scores his runs in such an ugly manner, and at such a rapid rate. This fear of confidence in South Africa is utterly bizarre. The perception of Smith is based more on emotion than the make-up of the man.
So the executive committee decided to replace Arthur and sack the selectors. But who are the committee? What gives them that right? And what are they doing to help the lack of transformation?
Why had Australia's front man bucked popular opinion and chosen one-dayers over cricket's version of Beatlemania? Why turn his back on truckloads of cash, packed crowds, adrenaline rushes, sure-fire ratings hits and even more truckloads of cash? His simple answer: ''World Cup.''
It's just not what
The Samoans named their bespoke version of the sport kilikiti (or kirikiti), a Polynesian transliteration of cricket. The major change was in the number of players per side, which was increased to allow greater participation. "It is nothing unusual to see 30 or 40 opposed to one another," Churchwood wrote, "and I have known them to play as many as 200 odd a side. The fact is, that these matches are of one town against another, in which all insist upon taking a hand. These huge meetings, as may be readily imagined, last a week or more, junketing going on the whole time, and generally wind up with a big feast."
The immediacy of Arthur’s resignation – it had not yet come from the horse’s mouth as this was penned – caught me off-guard, as it would have most
Coaching or captaining this country, with the unique factors and needs that accompany it, is a particularly exhausting responsibility, and this against a universal backdrop which suggests more and more that coaches in professional sport have definite “shelf-lives” anyway.
Though Mickey Arthur's decision to quit is yet to be confirmed by the South African board, the opinion writers have already started work
Arthur perhaps didn't love the stress and tension that came with the job (who would?), but he revelled in being involved in the highs and lows that the national team has romped through since he was appointed in May 2005. If he was hurt by the suggestions that his nickname was Mickey Mouse and he was no more than Smith's puppet, then Arthur didn't show it.
The mere arrival of Wessels would probably quell that swiftly, and it is possible that some of his known non-negotiables – like personal discipline and devotion to conditioning – would help propel Smith and company beyond just sporadic major triumph but also to the ability to bed down emphatically at pinnacles rather than visit them disappointingly fleetingly.
Anil Padmanabhan writes in the Indian business paper Mint that Indian cricket has scored two self-goals over the past week that could damage the prospects of using sports to ease tensions in the subcontinent - first, Sehwag's dismissive remarks
This came through clearly in both incidents, which smack of immaturity. Popular reaction, both in Pakistan and initially in Bangladesh, was predictable—a round of India trashing. Of course, Bangladesh chose to largely ignore the slight and hence did not escalate the matter; in any case, since the remarks came from a normally reticent Sehwag, one could safely assume it was not a case of the in-your-face display of testosterone that comes naturally to Australian cricketers.
However, the IPL incident illustrated the undesirable manner in which this tournament has evolved. We would never know whether the government sent a signal to IPL or whether the franchisees, in what seems to be statistically improbable, individually came to the same decision to not bid for Pakistani cricketers. In either case, the logic was not probably thought through.
Robert Craddock writes in the Courier-Mail that Nathan Hauritz may just be the best thing for Australian spin since Shane Warne.
There's a famous photo of a national under-19 carnival in the late 1990s, when Warne was in his prime, containing a group of Warne wannabes – young spinners with blond streaks, ear-rings and big dreams. None of them progressed further than grade cricket. Very few leg-spinners ever do. The message was that Warne was a freak.
Iain Payten, writing in the Daily Telegraph , says day-night Tests with pink balls sounds like an exciting idea.
But is it too simplistic for cricket's bosses to assume that by flicking on the lights, both the traditional and new-age fans will pour through the gates? Is it even logical? Just playing a game - or a good portion of it - under lights won't change its basic nature. Test cricket is a game of patience, endurance and tactics and sundown won't magically serve as a cue for batsmen to throw it all away and start slogging like madmen.
What is wrong with the job? There is the loneliness; the long hours; the exhausting travel; and the intense scrutiny by the media, especially by former players on TV. There are arguments over the use of technology; open indignation from players; and a perceived lack of support from the ICC when the muck flies. Among those who have officiated at the top level are plenty who believe that the modern-day umpire is an isolated individual engaged in a thank- less task for relatively modest reward – around £65,000 a year. The working conditions can breed an unhealthy paranoia.
There has been much talk of the principle that "the umpire's decision is final" and how it represents one of the absolute and inviolable tenets of the game – as if the game was designed for the benefit of the umpires rather than the players or spectators. The notion that the umpire's authority is constantly undermined by the UDRS makes little sense to me.