Cricket is a popular sport
in Australia.
It’s so popular in fact that
it manages to be the highest rating Summer sport in a country which generally
experiences Summer most of the year.
Its popularity is so great
that it succeeds despite being run by people that hate the game. That would be like Luke Skywalker being left
in charge of the Rancor and not crushing it under a grate.
Since the game has been
broadcast in Australia on radio, television and other mediums, Australian
cricketers have become more accessible to the viewing public and taken on
broader and more recognised personalities.
Don Bradman so captured the
publics imagination that he was given a State Funeral (thankfully he was
deceased at the time), while Shane Warne has given hope to bogans the country
over that they may too sleep with Liz Hurley one day.
The majority of cricketers
are remembered for excelling in the field (e.g. Glenn McGrath), in certain
matches (e.g. Bob Massie taking 16/137 at Lords) or exploits off the field.
 |
| Case in point. |
Now we have Watto.
Shane Watson is arguably the
most memorable Australian cricketer for all the wrong reasons; including that
the public not only dislike him, they like to see him fail.
Shadenfreude is a
description never before linked to Australian cricketers, much like “well
groomed”.
 |
| Case in point |
Originally picked as a
bowling all-rounder, Watto was so enthusiastic in his first Test that he fellover after bowling. Later as a batsman he would fall over his front pad.
It wasn’t until the
ill-feted Ashes tour of 2009, when Watto was asked to open in the absence of
anyone else being willing to, that he rose to prominence. To his credit, he did a good job and was
Australia’s best performing cricketer for about 2 years of overall team mediocrity.
It was perhaps being the
best player in an average team, as well as his inability to earn selection
through batting or bowling alone, that earned him criticism that stayed with
him throughout his career.
It probably didn’t help that
he kept running himself and team-mates out, or using up DRS referrals either.
Foreign observers were quick
to point out that Australia’s tall poppy syndrome was strongly at play in
regards to the criticism of Watto, to which locals retorted; “nah mate, he’s
just a wanker”.
Indeed he did himself no
favours by appearing quite pleased with his…appearance, but then diversity
should be celebrated.
|
| Or maybe not |
But is Watto the worst Watto
to have played for Australia, and if not, does he deserve the criticism?
Looking back at cricketers
from the past, there aren’t too many that fit the Watto profile of promising,
failing, yet still picked.
Kim Hughes, subject of
arguably the BEST CRICKET BOOK EVER, was as gifted a batsman as Australia had
produced but was inconsistent to the point of consistency. I’m sure that’s a thing.
Hughes had all the potential
there was to be a cricketer and occasionally showed it, but mostly didn’t. Also, he cried.
Michael Slater was an
excellent, aggressive opening batsman for Australia, but his record of going
out in the 90s made him something of an object of ridicule by fans.
Later fans got to know more
about his personality when he became a commentator. He was then ridiculed
further.
Of late, Dave Warner has showed
some Watto-like characteristics; performing inconsistently and being a bit of a
tool off the pitch, but his good performances are extraordinary and do occur
often enough.
Statistics are the gospel of
Cricket history and the ability to understand them is essentially why
mathematics is taught in Australian schools.
Batsmen who retire from the
game with an average over 50 are hailed.
The Dons numbers are folklore in Australia; his average is 99.94 and he
made a total of 6996 runs.
Wattos numbers will be
remembered more for being failures (4 centuries), particularly as he had so
many opportunities (59 Tests).
In his defence, he didn’t
pick himself, though like the ‘Fast and the Furious’ franchise, he didn’t get
any better over time.
Thanks for the memories
Watto.
No comments:
Post a Comment