A moral quandary for English fans
After years of Ashes' humiliation, England finally have the upperhand against Australia in their own backyard
Nitin Sundar
25-Feb-2013
After years of Ashes' humiliation, England finally have the upperhand against Australia in their own backyard. The Daily Telegraph's Jonathan Liew, however, says that the country is not sure how to deal with the good news.
It is the moral quandary facing all English cricket fans at the moment. To sympathise or not to sympathise? The idea of the mighty Australians being reduced to soapy panic and staring a heavy defeat in the face is a superficially appealing one. But when it actually happens, it’s like swatting the fly that’s been bothering you all afternoon.
As you examine its tiny, squashed features on your wall, the overwhelming emotion you feel is not really satisfaction, and certainly not triumph. Relief that you have re-established your supremacy over the insect kingdom, but regret that you’ve stained a perfectly good copy of the Radio Times.
Problems of a different kind for Australia, who are looking for Ricky Ponting's successor. Greg Baum writes in the Age that Shane Watson is a strong contender for the role, but only if the team can find a way to drop him to No. 6.
It would be unfair to ask Watson to open, bowl his quota and skipper the team, too; if made captain, he would have to return to No. 6, which would mean another restructure of a team already with too much of a jerrybuilt look about it.
Watson is ambitious, which is commendable; Test captaincy is not for the indifferent. At 29, his world view has broadened. But some doubt his capacity as a man-manager, especially of cricketers and their fragile egos. He is not famously subtle.
Nitin Sundar is a sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo