Is Australian dominance bad for the game?

For a team that simply cannot afford to lose in Sydney - Greased Lightning awaits at the WACA - India's preparations for the New Year Test have been far from ideal. A damaging story in The Age about Yuvraj Singh and alleged indiscipline broke a couple of days ago, and fitness worries over Zaheer Khan and Sourav Ganguly have further muddied the thought process. There was also a brief flirtation with Virender Sehwag in the nets, but the decision to leave him out of the 13 only gives strength to the voices that ask why he was picked in the first place.

The one man India cannot afford to lose is Zaheer. A pace attack of RP Singh and Ishant Sharma doesn't even bear thinking about on a ground where Ricky Ponting and Matthew Hayden sauntered to a fourth-innings target of 287 two seasons ago. If Zaheer does miss out with a heel problem, India may have no option but to sacrifice a specialist batsman and bring in Irfan Pathan. If that happens, and given what transpired at the MCG, Pathan might even open the batting.

Yuvraj is the one whose place is most in doubt. The attitude-problem quotes attributed to Lalchand Rajput, and strenuously denied by the team management, might just have queered the pitch for a man who scored a thrilling 169 from a precarious position just two Tests ago. Now, thanks to the opening conundrum and the need to field a balance side, he could be the one that gets the chop.

Is there any truth in the indiscipline rumours? None at all. Sources close to the team said as much, suggesting that Rajput's words might have been lost or misconstrued in translation. Yuvraj was pretty poor in the field in Melbourne, but he was by no means the only culprit. Australia's fielding and running between wickets are so markedly superior that they start each game with an invisible extra man, or at least 40 runs.

One school of thought argues that Australia's continued dominance is bad for the health of the game. That's the biggest pile of tosh anyone's come up with since Mohammed Saeed al-Sahaf and Donald Rumsfeld opened their mouths during the invasion of Iraq. Repeated thrashing at the hands of West Indies in the 1980s forced Australian cricket to look within and come up with answers. The system they have put in place since them is the envy of all, and if they keep winning, it has as much to do with the inadequacies of others as their own excellence.

At times in the past decade, India have pushed them hard, but on most occasions, individual brilliance has been the key, whether it be Harbhajan Singh's 32 wickets, VVS Laxman's 281 or Rahul Dravid's 233. The only side to outplay them as a group were England in 2005, and subsequent events have imbued that with lone-swallow-of-summer status. South Africa came up short in the mid-90s and again at the turn of the millennium, and India's disastrous outing at the MCG only proves that opposing teams have no margin for error against Australia, just as there were no second chances against the Caribbean juggernaut? Boring? Only if you celebrate mediocrity.

Comments

[Alex Groenen]

There is only one way to stem this dominance - improve ! Or wait for the Australian standards to slip.
My observation is - don't wait for the Australians to have a lapse !

Now - the comments stemming from the sub-continent on various conspiracies being the reason why Mr H. Singh received a 3 match suspension are illogical and at best overly emotive reactions to a perceived affront to national pride.
How a member of a typically gentle Indian cricket team be rascist ?
This is not a typical Indian team, they have vowed to take on the Australians in an aggessive fashion - perhaps the aggression from the Indian team has gone that one step too far.

The truth is the villification of a person based on their parentage is a vile practice - no matter who the detractor is. It should be stamped out whenever encountered.
Indian, Australian, nationality matters not.

In this case, The Australian cricket team believes that Mr H. Singh uttered the words "big monkey". Certainly, Mr Symonds does !
If Mr Singh did not utter those words, what personal price is at stake for him to offer an apology for a perceived offence ?
Even a statement form Mr Singh with words to the effect that the villification of any individual by comparison to a monkey is abhorrent to him would pour oil on the racism-stirred waters of the current India-Australia series.
Though well short of the apology expected by the Australians, such a statement would go a very long way to ameliorating the situation. It would be a very expressive commitment to the rejection of racism from the Indian team.
The lack of action from the BCCI on the racist "monkey" taunts from the indian crowds lives long in the memory of cricket fans who were unfortunate enough to see the provocative & vocal racist displays directed at Andrew Symonds on the 2007 Tour of India by Austraia.
To this day, the denial by BCCI of the racist nature of these taunts rankles deeply.
Racism is not the exclusive property of fair-skinned people, it can be found in ALL cultures, and should be watched for and guarded against.

[ashokpai]

even though australians are the best in almost all departments of the same, they will never be regarded as true winners. but rather as whiners, who couldnt stand competition. they have sullied the game. they killed the gentlemean's game long back. now they want it to be more like a streetfighters game. and that too in their favour only.

I will go by sachin's word for bhajji's innocence. australian team has got together to frame him. symonds and ponting are the worst offenders. clarke is simply a liar, and ponting blatantly so. the other stooges in this drama are the 3rd umpire, mike procter and lastly the totally inept benson and terrible mr. bucknor.

i think the aussie players have thought that they are born to win, a semblance of a fight should be dealt with any and every way possible, after all thats what their dossier says - win in any way at all costs, and indians had to pay a heavy price for their stupidity in thinking yet another decision is 'one-off'. its time as said goodbye australia, and your sick ways.other teams should also say we've had enough of your "friendly banter" such as reminding you that you were not born to your parents but rather someone else. its disgusting that bhajjie is indicted for something what he's not said, and brad hogg is having a field day after saying the worst of the abuse to indians.

[Realist]

Dileep. A fascinating first days play. But the umpiring and fielding suited eachother. The awful decisions took away from the effort of the bowlers. As was the fielding (with the mighty exception of Tendulkar whose shoulders must be surely tested).
And as the day went by the Indian team dropped their shoulders. Do not ever give it up. Ever.
The field placements didn't help either. I really believe that Kumble needs to look at his captaincy and attack.
But given that, this wicket will bat well for the next day and I expect that India should score a few runs, if they keep their batting steady.

[Hugh]

Agreed. Australia have the best bowlers, batting line up (gee, Brad Hogg even looked good for a 50 before the declaration) and by far the best fielders. More than that, they are truly dedicated to excellence and improvement, despite being so dominant for so long, and are motivated by their involvement in a team that has absolute legend status in this country's sporting ethos. The baggy green has an almost mythical power.

Australia continue to set the standards for the rest, but it is all cyclical and before long another nation or two will challenge their dominance for a while. At least I hope so. I'm Australian and I would like to see some worthy adversaries take us on. If nothing else, we Australians enjoy making people pay for upsetting us. Just ask the English.