I’m not one of those Australian cricket commentators who reckons the Aussie team should all be sacked. In fact, I’m not quite sure what they’ve done wrong, but I’ll try and work through a few of the allegations:

1. Did Singh call Symonds a “monkey”?
I think he did, but he probably didn’t intend it as a racist term. However, he knew that Symonds did consider it to be racially offensive, as they apparently had a chat about this very issue during the one-day series in India last October, so it probably wasn’t a smart thing to do. Maybe Singh forgot about that in the heat of the moment, so he just went and used the first offensive term that came to his head. So Singh is offended when he is accused of being racist (because he didn’t intend to be), whilst Symonds feels that he’s been the victim of racism and, in accordance with ICC rules, his captain informed the match referee. I’m just theorising here, but this does seem to work for me.
Update: January 13, 2008 …
It looks like my theory was close to being right. According to the Indians, Harbhajan used an offensive Punjabi phrase - “maa ki” (which means “motherf…”) - it sounds like “monkey”, but it was not a racial taunt. Was this version of events put forward during the initial hearing with match referee Mike Procter? Anyway, this is the line the Indians will be putting forward when the appeal is heard some time after the third Test in Perth. However, I don’t understand why the Indians would think this phrase is OK, but they’ve accused Brad Hogg of racial vilification for calling a couple of the Indians “bastards”. Smells like double standards to me. If Brad Hogg is guilty for using the term “bastards”, then Harbhajan Singh is guilty for using “maa ki”.

2. Should Andrew Symonds have walked after edging one through to the ‘keeper early on in his innings?
No. Hardly anyone does, so we can’t say he did anything unusual or that he “cheated”, as some are saying. Take a look at this footage of Harbhajan Singh being clean bowled by Kevin Pietersen. Singh is clearly out, yet he refused to walk. So the Indians can hardly say that they are a team of righteous, “we always walk” sorts of guys.

3. Should the Australians have appealed for the Rahul Dravid caught behind?
Yes. The video footage, in slow motion, suggests that the ball came off Dravid’s front pad, yet the Aussies all appealed. Why? First up, the rules of cricket state that you’ve got to appeal in order to get a guy out (unless it’s an obvious one like being bowled, eh Harbhajan), so if they don’t appeal then, even if the umpire thinks the batsman is out, he can’t raise the finger. That’s why you’ll see players appealing all the time for anything caught behind. They’re usually a bit better for the LBWs, but some, even the Indians, can get a bit ridiculous with those. So I reckon if the situation had been reversed and it had been Mike Hussey batting, and if Huss had edged the ball off his pad to the ‘keeper, I think the Indians would have appealed too. It’s then up to the umpire to make the call.

4. Was the umpiring really that bad?
Yes. The umpiring was terrible, and perhaps it changed the result of the game. Here’s a collection of poor umpiring decisions from that 2nd Test, as shown on Indian television:

I don’t think Australia “cheated”, as some are saying, I just think they were fortunate enough this time to have most of the poor decisions going in their favour. There have been plenty of occasions in the past when poor umpiring has gone against the Australians … see, for example, pretty much every Test match Australia played in India and Pakistan during the 1980s. So if the Indians and sporting public in general have a problem, then it should be directed at the umpires, not the Australian cricket team.

Having said that, umpiring is a tough job. I spent a season working as a professional umpire when I was just a teenager living in Melboure, and it was hard work. The pressure is intense, and mistakes are easily made. Umpires Steve Bucknor and Mark Benson are experienced guys, and they’d be used to a fair bit of pressure, but they are still only human and will therefore make the occasional mistake. The replays we get on television make it all too easy for us as we sit in our lounge rooms, but it’s not as easy as that when you’re out there in the middle with the noise of 30,000 people buzzing around.

We were doing one drill called the ‘cut and pull’ with two groups either side of me, requiring an accurate throw from one side so that I could cut.

Flintoff was in such a state that he could not throw properly. He had to pass the ball to the bloke next to him to do so … I was fuming and stopped the practice early. Remember: this was the England captain in this state.

Fletcher considered dropping Flintoff as captain. I think he should have. In fact, he should have taken the lead that the Australian team did with Andrew Symonds when he was also inebriated at a training run - dropped for the game. It turned Symonds around, and maybe it would have helped Flintoff as well. As it is, they did nothing, and things only got worse as Flintoff again got too friendly with the drink at the World Cup.

Naturally enough, this criticism of England’s Super Fred has caused quite a furore, with Lancashire’s CEO saying that Vaughan’s comments were “despicable”, and now Vaughan is saying he was misquoted, a claim The Guardian denies.

However, this blog is dedicated to talk about the Ashes, so did Vaughan have anything to say about that? Absolutely! The Guardian asked Michael Vaughan if Flintoff was the wrong choice to replace him as captain in the Ashes:

“With the way Australia played, and the injuries we picked up, it would have been very difficult for anyone to match their intensity and character. But when you bat, bowl and field in an Ashes series, it’s a hell of an ask to be captain as well. People also have to remember that when I took on Australia as captain I’d had almost 2½ years in the job. Fred didn’t have that experience.”

Shall we take that as a “Yes”?

Michael, I suppose you could have helped England in their Ashes campaign if you’d been allowed to?

“I could’ve taken a little of that pressure. I spoke to Flintoff a few times but it was made clear to me I had to get myself fit first.”

You’re obviously fairly confident in your own ability:

“I’m not an arrogant guy - everyone knows that.
… A day will come when I think England will be better without me but at the minute I think they’re a lot better off with me. There’s nothing wrong in thinking you’re quite good.”

Right, you’re not arrogant, you’ve just come to recognise the fact that England minus Michael Vaughan is a mere shadow of the team they are with you … when you’re not under pressure, anyway.

Perhaps it all became just a bit too much for him. Granted, he was in charge when England lost the Ashes 5-0, then Vaughan came back and England defeated Australia in the one-day series final. That can’t have done much for Freddie’s confidence. Then the England team heads over to the World Cup with some degree of confidence, and promptly lose to New Zealand in their first game. Time to, er, celebrate with a few drinks and a cruise. In a pedal boat. And a bit of a swim at 4am.

Mind you, this isn’t the first time a top cricketer has found the appeal of a right royal booze up too hard to resist, and it won’t be the last. However, it should not ever be encouraged, and I congratulate the England team management on their tough stance against such behaviour. Apparently Flintoff was warned about his excessive drinking a few times on the recent Ashes tour, but it wasn’t until he took things just a little too far that any firm action was taken.

It’s time to move on, Freddie. Let’s see if you can get back some of that lost form, and show some heroics on the field, not off it.

Late last year Australia won the Champions Trophy for the first time, and for the first half of the Commonwealth Bank One Day Series, we were unbeatable. Then we lost to New Zealand, then 3 games in a row to England, and now we’ve been beaten by New Zealand by 10 wickets - the first time Australia has lost by such a margin in one-day internationals.

I can’t explain it.

Perhaps, to re-phrase a famous quote by former Australian Prime Minister Paul Keating, this is “the form slump we had to have”. Before we can go on to greater things, we have to perform as poorly as we can. The Australian team we learn from this run of losses, and they’ll grow into an even more fearsome squad because of it.

In support of this case I present Exhibit A - The Ashes 2005. On that occasion we experienced injuries to key players, and poor team selection. In this most recent game we were without Ponting, Gilchrist, Lee, Symonds, and Clarke. At least three of those guys should be right for the World Cup, but Symonds and Lee are in doubt. Both of them are key players who are impossible to replace, and their loss may be enough to completely destabilise the Australian XI.

At least, this is what I hope is going on. The other option, of course, is that the rest of the world has finally caught up to Australia and we can’t handle the pressure:

“What the global community try to do is catch up … and look for weaknesses that other teams have exposed.”
- Stephen Fleming

It must be said that the Kiwis played some beautiful cricket in yesterday’s game. Shane Bond took 5 wickets, and Vincent and Fleming blew away all five of Australia’s bowlers. So we can’t say that it’s simply a result of Australia not being able to put a world class team out onto the field (although I think that was a factor).

So, Australia has two more games, and I’m pretty sure they’ll need to win both of them if the want to hold on to top spot on the world rankings. At the moment, though, I think Australia will have to get used to second place, because that’s where they’ll be a week from now.

Well, England’s tour has finished on a high with a 34 run victory over the Australians in Sydney. The local boys bowled OK and fielded brilliantly, and Glenn McGrath’s one day international career in Australia finished with a wicket off his final ball, just like he did in the Sydney Test. Unfortunately, when it came time for the Aussies to bat the combination of rain interruptions and some beautiful swing bowling from Liam Plunkett was too much to handle. It’s always tough batting second at the SCG, and England’s bowlers didn’t make it any easier by bowling some pretty good lines to the Australians under ideal conditions. Rain swept through all evening, and the storms caused some pretty severe damage around the state. But the real damage was done out on the field by Paul Collingwood … again. (I know, it’s a pretty cheesy quote, but it just had to be said.)

So, the Australians have now lost three games in a row to England, and look to be just a shadow of the team they were a few weeks ago. Where did it all go wrong? Did the loss of Andrew Symonds and the constant team changes have a negative effect on the team? Have they been training too hard for their own good? Or has England simply stepped up a level, thus showing the Australians to be just an ordinary side that has been lucky enough to face poor opposition?

“I just don’t think you can fit Stuey and Glenn in the same squad. I might be tempted to go for Stuey.
Shaun Tait has to be in there - he’s lethal and can rip through the tailenders. I’d have Stuey and Shaun in there together and, if that happens, you can’t fit in Glenn.”
- Michael Slater

On the day that Glenn McGrath dropped a crucial catch and went wicketless, Stuart Clark took a hat trick for New South Wales and finished the innings with 8 for 58.

Perhaps McGrath will turn it all around in the 2nd Final against England today, as he often performs at his best when it’s really needed. The Australians were badly hurt by the loss on Friday night, so in today’s second final I’m expecting to see a turn around as significant as we saw after the Ashes loss in 2005. Australia should be at their dominant best, but then again …

The England team were talking up their chances prior to this game, and on this occasion they were actually able to deliver, with a stunning 4 wicket victory at the MCG. And they can thank one man - Paul Collingwood. He took a stunning catch, made two run outs, and then belted 120 not out. As Peter Roebuck said, it “reinforced his standing in the game and confirmed his reputation as a scrapper”.

The Australians have underperformed once again, and there has got to be some concern about that. Perhaps it is the result of the heavy training they have been doing in preparation for the World Cup and they are simply exhausted. If that’s the case then fair enough - the pain now will be worth the gain later on if they can be at their best in the Caribbean.

Or perhaps Australia’s poor performance was a result of England’s fightback. The Australians haven’t faced much fight from the England team all summer, so perhaps they’ve forgotten how to stand up when the pressure’s on. If so, then last night’s loss might be good for them. A time to reassess how they coped in the face of strong opposition - exactly the sort of stuff they’ll get at the World Cup.

So, can England win this Commonwealth Bank Series? They only need to win one more match, and they’ll have two chances to do it. Three weeks ago we would have all said that a single victory was impossible for England, but now it seems as though the pigs might be cleared for takeoff. If England can win, then the bacon will fly.

New Zealand threw away a finals berth at the Gabba with some sloppy fielding and careless batting. Falling 14 runs short of a gettable England total, New Zealand only have themselves to blame.

Paul Collingwood finally made some runs with 106, and NZ captain Stephen Fleming also contributed heavily with another 106, but it will be England who plays Australia in the best of three finals series. In this Ashes year, I think that’s entirely appropriate.

Based on last nights effort, I don’t think Australia has too much to worry about. Liam Plunkett is bowling well, but apart from the occasional standout performance, the English batsmen have been largely ineffective. Though as we have seen, if just one of England’s top order can get going then they could post a defendable total. I think the Australian bowling will need to improve further if they really want to dominate things, because at the moment they just look a little vulnerable when under pressure.

It’s going to be an interesting finals campaign. Here’s hoping for a close finish.

It took a couple of gutsy batting performances from Ponting and Hodge, but Australia has added another victory to their list of successes this summer.

After a poor performance in his last game against England, Shaun Tait stepped up to the plate with a brilliant display of pace and swing. We all knew he was quick, but in his second over he sent down the fastest delivery of the summer - a 160.2 km/h inswinger that crashed into Lou Vincent’s pads. He was also incredibly efficient, going for just 26 runs from 10 overs whilst taking 1 wicket. If he could bowl like that all the time he’d be a match winner, but he can also be somewhat wayward. And I mean really, really wayward. He played two games for Durham in 2004 where he bowled 18 wicketless overs for the cost of 176 runs. He is obviously much better than that, and if he continues to bowl well this summer he should be a regular in the Aussie Test and one-day squads.

However, Australia still needs to improve their bowling during the final overs of the innings. On this occasion the New Zealand lower order were able to grab an extra 71 runs from the final 7 overs, and it was almost enough to beat the Aussies. Everyone has the Australians down as favourites to win the World Cup, but I think they’ve got a bit of work to do in the bowling department.