Cynical Strauss deserves contempt
Andrew Strauss is either a weak leader or he has no idea about the spirit of cricket, writes Malcolm Conn in the Australian
Jamie Alter
25-Feb-2013
Andrew Strauss is either a weak leader or he has no idea about the spirit of cricket, writes Malcolm Conn in the Australian. Conn is scathing in his criticism of England's decision to send an acting 12th man and physiotherapist on to the field in the dying minutes of the tensely drawn first Test, terming it "disgraceful".
As captain, Strauss is responsible for the fundamental fabric of the game, which has been tarnished as a result of his appalling cynicism. While players do not make reading the Laws of Cricket a high priority, Strauss should be well aware of the preamble that reinforces the spirit of the game.
In the Sydney Morning Herald Peter Roebuck says Australia looked united and solid, and the captain himself had a splendid match, both with the bat and as the side's driving force. In Roebuck's view Ponting deserves credit for choosing Ben Hilfenhaus and Nathan Hauritz, the two best bowlers in the match. That is not to say he is a master tactician, however.
The two places you never want your opponent to get to are, in your head and under your skin. And England, with their stunning Test match salvage operation, have done both to Ricky Ponting, writes Robert Craddock in his blog on the Courier-Mail website.
Cricket has only itself to blame for the deeply cynical English tactic that so got up Ricky Ponting's nose in the tense final moments of a ripping Test.The rot set in years ago, when the 12th man carrying the traditional tray of fizzy drinks (real glasses, real ice) was replaced by a motorised advertising cart with sundry support staff. Patrick Smithers in the Age is of the opinion that there are too many people on the field, too often.
The time wasting tactics employed by England has prompted Suresh Menon to ask in the dreamcricket.com website if it is time for cricket to follow the ways of basketball, where the clock is stopped when there is no action on the field.
In the Daily Mail, Nasser Hussain says that while some amount of time wasting is part of the game, the England team will have to do it in a more subtle manner. But the bottom line is that the two teams go into the second Test with the scores level, Nasser says.
What Ponting objected to is the way England went about their time-wasting and in that sense I would have to agree with him. For 99.9 per cent of that gripping day, they did as much as possible within the laws and spirit of the game to save the first Test - but right at the end they crossed the line.
Duncan Fletcher, in the Guardian, isn't too pleased to receive 'play in the right spirit' lectures from Ricky Ponting.The former England coach remembers the 2005 Ashes tour where Ponting turned overly aggressive on the umpires when a decision didn't go his way.
The way he objected after Aleem Dar rightly turned down a catch at silly point off Paul Collingwood was typical. Back in 2005 Ponting and his team were over-aggressive towards the umpires on a regular basis, and he was at it again here. Ponting has to be careful. Someone needs to sit down and ask him what he understands by the spirit of the game. The way he plays is definitely not in the spirit. And if the Australians would have you think that they'd have done things differently on Sunday evening, then pigs might soon be spotted in the skies above St John's Wood.
In the Independent, James Lawton agrees with Ricky Ponting's frustration with the time wasting tactics, adding that gamesmanship has no place in cricket
Jamie Alter is a senior sub-editor at ESPNcricinfo