Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.
In the past two years, we have witnessed the destruction of mens cricket in Australia. From cheating to racism to homophobia, Australia has seen it all. What will it take for the reputation of Cricket Australia to be restored? Will the team ever return to its former glory?
24 March 2018. A day forever marked by scandal and shame for the Australian national mens cricket team. From this point on, Cricket Australia spiralled significantly in regard to mens cricket, with a newly appointed coach and captain struggling to return the team to its former glory.
Whilst several established players, excluding Steve Smith and David Warner, have been successful in maintaining the trust of the public since the incident, behaviour from other players has been more than questionable.
Australian cricketers have had a history of poor behaviour since the 1932 Ashes, from players leaking information, to an unofficial team bribed to tour South Africa, as well as the infamous underarm bowling incident in 1981. And it seems as though Cricket Australia has all but encouraged this behaviour.
Take Marcus Stoinis as an example. In the most recent Big Bash League season, the Melbourne Stars batsman received a $7500 fine for a homophobic slur he used against Perth Scorchers bowler, Kane Richardson. Stoinis did not receive any other sanction except this fine, a fine which he paid comfortably on his $227,900 salary.
On his next match, he managed to hit 147 runs off 79 balls, breaking a BBL record. Murmurs of Stoinis excellent form and undoubted selection in the upcoming T20 World Cup were beginning to rise, and, as expected, he was named the leading run scorer of BBL09.
From this point on, there was no mention of his hateful comments towards Richardson. There was no mention of how as a role model, he had failed those who looked up to him. All that mattered now was his record-breaking performance in the game.
What message does this send to the public? What does it teach young people about achieving their goals? It instils this idea in them that their behaviour and their attitude does not matter, and that their actions have no consequences.
A perfect example of this is the recent Under-19 Cricket World Cup held in January. Several players had been accused of casual racism due to comments that were made on batsman Jake Fraser-McGurks Instagram post.
Fraser-McGurk was expressing his excitement over the team entering the quarter-finals, when several of his teammates left comments which included, Sir great player, big fan and will play for India one day and Sir, give me Whatsapp number I want to be friend. This racist mockery of non-English speaking fans was later deleted by the players, but it was too late. The damage had been done.
Uproar ensued in following days of the post, and Cricket Australia made an announcement that the sanctions the players would face would be determined upon their arrival back in Australia, as many of them were minors. But what really happened when these players returned home? What penalty did they receive for their actions?
After they returned to Sydney, the young men were addressed by a Cricket Australia official who explained to them how and why their actions were wrong, as well as the dangers of social media. They were told to return back to their respective states and educate their peers and other young players on what they learnt from this experience. Described by some as a bump in their learning curve to becoming national icons, one has to wonder, does the punishment fit the crime?
Throughout all of this controversy, Cricket Australia has been lurking in the shadows, making vague claims of a culture change within its people, performance and leadership. They have declared their newly established focus on helping players understand what constitutes unacceptable and inappropriate behaviour, and ensuring that staff and players are able to voice their concerns in a safe and fair environment. But has this alleged change been enough to convince the nation?
Well, through the recording of players journeys as they discover a newfound respect for the game, a docuseries has emerged. One which is carefully crafted and displays the highs and lows of the national mens team as they demonstrate to Australia the result of this supposed culture change. Released in March on Amazon Prime, the show was titled The Test: A New Era for Australia’s Team.
Throughout this docuseries, we catch a rare insight behind-the-scenes of the Australian cricket team, watching players struggle as they travel on the road to redemption. We see newly appointed captain, Tim Paine, and coach, Justin Langer, strive to revive what was once an exceptional team, we see Steve Smith and David Warner make a glorious return following their 12-month ban and we see the emergence of new players as they persevere through this cricket crisis. This series allows us to journey with the Australian team as they fight to repair their damaged reputation.
But we cannot allow ourselves to be blinded by this spectacle. Lets call this show out for what it really is. Is it a glimpse into the revival of mens cricket in Australia? Or is it simply propaganda telling us what to feel and think? Considering the series is co-produced by Cricket Australia, it begs the question, how much was the original footage interfered with in the making of the show? Why does it appear to make certain players fault-free in regard to their involvement in the ball-tampering scandal? Are we seeing the full picture of what occurred in its aftermath?
Players, and more importantly Cricket Australia, constantly seem to forget that the game requires form on and off the field. The current culture of the game, despite the claims of it changing, is destroying the reputation of players as well as the country. This culture is deeply ingrained throughout all forms of the game and all ages, including the U-19 national team. If players cant control their attitude and behaviour, they should simply save themselves and us the embarrassment.
When I first received this assignment, I knew immediately that I would write an opinion piece. As a person who likes to share their opinions with other people, maybe even impose it at times, it seemed only fitting that I would use this opportunity to express my thoughts. The reason I chose to write about the Australian cricket team was because of the Amazon Prime docuseries, The Test: A New Era for Australia’s Team. While I was watching this series, a number of thoughts occurred to me. Is this meant to be a justification of what has happened in the last few years? Are Cricket Australia actually taking responsibility for what happened? What does the culture of Australian cricket say about the rest of the nation? Most people have swept the answers to these questions under the rug, ignoring the underlying problem within Cricket Australia. This is why I wanted my opinion piece to express another point of view, one that makes readers focus on the questions that they ignored. The purpose of this piece is to give readers another perspective on what cricket means in Australia.
In my piece, I found it difficult to choose what topics to cover as I wanted to cover. In my first draft, I wrote about all the topics I had initially researched, such as ball-tampering, homophobia, racism, coaching, selectors and the mental health of players. However, once I finished my first draft, I was significantly over the word limit and decided to focus more on homophobia, racism and the documentarys role in showing the culture change in cricket. Deciding whether to include the mental health of players and how this was handled by Cricket Australia was a difficult decision, but I decided that in order to explain this properly and in a way that left an impact on readers, it would be best not to include it at all due to the limited word count.
Two authors that influenced my piece were Katharine Murphy and Bridie Jabour. Both write opinion pieces for The Guardian and have completely different writing styles. Murphy writes in a sarcastic and witty voice. However, Jabour uses a voice that is very straightforward and almost conversational. She also uses lots of questions in her writing, a way to engage her readers. I initially tried to imitate the voice of Murphy in my piece, but after my first draft, I realised I was not able to do this successfully. In my second draft, I then switched to a voice similar to that of Jabour, attempting to engage readers with a conversational tone and questions.
Another major influence on my piece was the Netflix original docuseries, Formula 1: Drive to Survive. This series shows behind-the-scenes of Formula 1 racing around the world, and, while watching it, my mind immediately drew comparisons between this series and the cricket docuseries. Whilst both were filmed in similar ways and had the same goal (to show the audience behind-the-scenes of the sport), the Formula 1 series seemed much more real and candid than The Test, which simply told viewers what they wanted to hear rather than providing them with the full picture. This led me to the conclusion that The Test was more of a broadcast of the supposed redemption of the Australian cricket team instead of an insight into the world of cricket.
Overall, by being able to express my own opinions in this piece and having drawn ideas from a variety of sources, I think I achieved my purpose in providing another perspective on Australian cricket. Although I was unable to include all my initial ideas, I think it is still a strong and persuasive article.
Order from us for quality, customized work in due time of your choice.