The Herald
By Robson Sharuko
27th November 2009
PETER ROEBUCK — the controversial Australian journalist whose description of the Zimbabwe Cricket leadership a bunch of FRAUDSTERS, ABYSMAL THUGS AND NASTY CREATURES has torched a storm here — struggles to bowl a consistent line, in terms of his analysis, to the extent of bordering on hypocrisy.
The former Somerset skipper — in damning reports that have appeared in Australian and South African newspapers — has been calling for the isolation of Zimbabwe from the global cricket family and slamming overtures made recently by those willing to help the game back on its feet.
Roebuck describes ZC chairman Peter Chingoka as a snake, chameleon and a corrupt leader and heaps a lot of praise on those who are still stuck in the trenches, prolonging the battles to try and topple the domestic cricket leadership, as men of integrity and honour.
The reports have created a storm here after they were posted by the Minister of Education, Sport, Arts and Culture, David Coltart, on his official website with the ZC leadership questioning the intentions of their parent minister and wondering whether it’s a sign that he agrees with their contents.
But should the ZC leadership lose sleep over an international cricket commentator who appears to change his spots, like a chameleon, when it suits him?
Maybe a quick call to Australian national cricket team skipper Ricky Ponting might enable the ZC leadership get a better and deeper appreciation of the man who believes they are just a group of thugs and fraudsters.
Branding Ponting arrogant, and calling for his dismissal, Roebuck blasted the Aussie skipper with so much vitriol that it left the master batsman in shock wondering whether he had done something that had just triggered the world’s third global war.
In the aftermath of the row that followed allegations that Indian spinner Harbhajan Singh had racially abused black Australian cricketer, Andrew Symonds, during the Sydney Test last year, Roebuck aimed all his missiles at Ponting and left him battered and bruised.
Roebuck claimed that Ponting’s antics in that game brought shame upon the honourable tradition of all those who had worn the Aussie baggy green cap.
Roebuck’s Attack On Arrogant Ponting
“Ricky Ponting must be sacked as captain of the Australian cricket team,” wrote Roebuck in a scathing column that was published in many newspapers, including the front page of The Age in Australia.
“If Cricket Australia cares a fig for the tattered reputation of our national team in our national sport, it will not for a moment longer tolerate the sort of arrogant and abrasive conduct seen from the captain and his senior players in the past few days.
“It was the ugliest performance by an Australian side for 20 years. The only surprising part of it is that the Indians have not already packed and gone home.
“That the senior players in the Australian team are oblivious to the fury they raised, among many followers of the game in this country and beyond its shores, merely confirms their own narrow and self-obsessed viewpoint.
“Pained past players called to express their private disgust. It was a wretched and ill-mannered display and not to be endured from any side let alone an international outfit representing a proud sporting nation.
“Make no mistake, it is not only the reputation of these cricketers that has suffered — Australia itself has been embarrassed.
“THE NOTION THAT PONTING CAN HEREAFTER TAKE THE AUSTRALIAN TEAM TO INDIA IS PREPOSTEROUS. HE HAS SHOWN NOT THE SLIGHTEST INTEREST IN THE WELL-BEING OF THE GAME, NOT THE SLIGHTEST SIGN OF DIPLOMATIC SKILL, NOT A SINGLE MARK OF RESPECT FOR HIS ACCOMPLISHED AND WIDELY ADMIRED OPPONENTS.
“IN THE PAST FEW DAYS, THE AUSTRALIAN CAPTAIN HAS PRESIDED OVER A PERFORMANCE THAT DRAGGED THE GAME INTO THE PITS.
“HE TURNED A GROUP OF PROFESSIONAL CRICKETERS INTO A PACK OF WILD DOGS. IF CRICKET AUSTRALIA CARES A FIG FOR THE TATTERED REPUTATION OF OUR NATIONAL TEAM IN OUR NATIONAL SPORT, IT WILL NOT FOR A MOMENT LONGER TOLERATE THE SORT OF ARROGANT AND ABRASIVE CONDUCT SEEN FROM THE CAPTAIN AND HIS SENIOR PLAYERS OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS.
“PONTING HAS NOT PROVIDED THE LEADERSHIP EXPECTED FROM AN AUSTRALIAN CRICKET CAPTAIN AND SO MUST BE SACKED.”
Roebuck On Ponting This August As Australia Stood On Brink Of Winning Ashes“Ponting has come a long way in a few months. HE HAS EMERGED AS A FINE LEADER, THOUGH NOT YET AN ASTUTE TACTICIAN,” he wrote in The Sydney Morning Herald, adding that the team’s future was secure under the leadership of its captain.
“CLEARLY HE HAS THE RESPECT OF HIS PLAYERS AND IS RELISHING THE OPPORTUNITY TO CAPTAIN A BRIGHT YOUNG SIDE.
“IF 2008 WAS HIS WORST YEAR, 2009 HAS BEEN HIS BEST.
“NOW HE STANDS ON THE EDGE OF A SUBSTANTIAL ACHIEVEMENT. HOLDING THE ASHES MIGHT NOT SEEM MUCH OF A FEAT. NOT SO LONG AGO AUSTRALIA BEAT THIS MOB 5-0.
“Moreover the opposing side has lost its two best players BUT AUSTRALIA HAVE ENDURED NUMEROUS SETBACKS AND STILL HEADS HAVE NOT DROPPED. NOR HAD CONDUCT DESTERIORATED.
“WHETHER IT WINS OR LOSES AT THE OVAL, AUSTRALIANS HAVE BEEN HONOURABLY REPRESNTED. THROUGHOUT THE FOURTH TEST THE TOURISTS PLAYED WITH VIGOUR BUT WITHOUT ACRID POSTURING.
“AT THE END OF 2008, AUSTRALIA DICTED AN AGEING SIDE AND PONTING DITCHED HIS STUBBORN STREAK. HE TOOK A NEW TEAM TO AFRICA AND PROMPTLY TOOK THE SPOILS. NOW HE HAS BROUGHT A HOTCHPOTCH OF A SIDE TO ENGLAND AND SURVIVED A DISAPPOINTMENT AND A DEFEAT TO PRODUCE A STIRRING FIGHTBACK.”
Talk about hypocrisy at its worst.
Ponting On Roebuck Criticism
The Australian captain, writing in his book Captain’s Diary 2008 — A Season of Tests, Turmoil and Twenty20 — revealed that he was shocked about the severity of the criticism he felt it was over the top.
“Peter Roebuck . . . had written a lengthy piece that demanded that I be sacked. The message in page one was loud and emphatic — Ponting Must Go,” the Aussie skipper wrote.
“He (Roebuck) was scathing in his criticism, which of course, he is entitled to, but to me he was far over the top it was ridiculous. IT WAS AS IF WE’D STARTED WORLD WAR III.
“He suggested that the entire cricket community was ‘disgusted’ and ‘distressed’ by our performance, but that was hardly the feedback I was getting.
“WE MADE THE MISTAKE OF ASSUMING THAT THOSE CLOSEST TO US WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BACK US AND REALISE THAT OUR CAUSE WAS NOBLE. WHEN WE DIDN’T GET THAT SUPPORT, WE WERE ANGRY AND FELT TOTALLY LET DOWN.
“I guess there was a certain naivety on my part in all of this (and) next time, I’ll want to be just as sure about my convictions as I was this time, but I’ll also want to be certain that the game is as committed to justice, as I am, before I put my reputation, and the reputation of my team-mates, on the line.
“There is a part of me that says in future I should steer clear of ‘cricket politics’ . . . but l don’t want to run away from my responsibilities. I couldn’t then, and I wouldn’t in future. Trust me.”
Glen Mitchell, Australia Broadcasting Corporation Commentator, on the Roebuck/Ponting Row
Glen Mitchell, who joined ABC Sport in January 1990, worked with Roebuck as part of the station’s Grandstand commentary team. Unlike his companion, Mitchell took a sober look at the issue and, to some extent, questioned part of his colleague’s inconsistency.
“A week is a long time in politics. And believe me, Ricky Ponting can certainly attest to that,” wrote Mitchell on his blog last year.
“During the first week of the New Year, in some people’s eyes he (Ponting) has transformed himself from saint to sinner. Fellow Grandstand commentator, and leading cricket journalist, Peter Roebuck has his own website – peterroebuck.com.
“Many of Peter’s articles are archived there, as well as other pieces penned by his website editor, Callum Twomey. The latter posted an article on 2 January, the first day of the controversy-charged second Test. It was titled, ‘Ponting graduates to top of the class.’
“It was a piece that extolled the virtues of the current Australian skipper. In part it stated that, ‘Ponting has been the perfect captaincy choice.’
“Yet, just six days later, the same website carried the Roebuck article that has led to a mixture of praise and condemnation. It appeared in the Fairfax press under the headline, “Ponting must be sacked.”
“According to peterroebuck.com, Ponting had gone from peacock to feather duster in less than a week. Are we, at times, too quick on the draw in our judgments?
“The history of cricket is littered with moments of infamy, many involving the game’s greats. Most of us don’t suffer the glare of public scrutiny, and our mistakes and foibles go largely unnoticed.
“If they were reported upon with the same intensity as our sports stars, I wonder how we would cope. They live in a fish bowl where every error in judgment is met with microscopic analysis. In the intensity of competition, at times, things go awry.
“It is foolhardy to believe otherwise. But the important thing is that the individual or team learn from their indiscretions and are allowed to atone for their behaviour. Merely erecting gallows each time someone falls from grace may not be the most appropriate solution.”
Aussie Fan Steve Contributing On the Debate On ABC Grandstand
“Interesting article and one that should have been written earlier instead of allowing the poisonous rubbish from Roebuck to hold centre stage so long. Of course most of us realise that very few cricketers from any country have had a career free of controversy, or not behaved stupidly on the odd occasion.
“No wonder the players wonder if they’ll have a home to go back to when they lose a game! Talk about fanning the flames Roebuck.”
Other Opinions In The Sydney Morning Herald
Ponting may have been rude, even arrogant. But at least he had the courage to stand up against racism in cricket. If only Roebuck had the same kind of courage instead of the petty cowardice his column displays — Michael Richardson, Frenchs Forest.
Peter Roebuck’s opinion defies belief — Mark Byron, Cooge.
In his self-righteous fury, Peter Roebuck has missed the point. The game I love dearly has survived tens of thousands of lousy umpiring decisions, and hundreds of captains who were more scoundrels than angel.
These are part of the texture and history of the game, and contribute greatly to its story. This was, supremely, an ‘I was there’ Test. But cricket may not survive respected commentators who forget themselves and who fan the flames in the media. Steve Bucknor and Ricky Ponting messed up, pure and simple but Roebuck has transformed their mess into a conspiracy, and his words are kerosene on simmering embers — Mark Donohoe, Mosman.
The laughable hypocrisy penned by Peter Roebuck is quickly evidenced by a glance at his bumptious website. “Ponting has been the perfect captaincy choice,” it trumpets. “Ricky Ponting has risen to be a man in control of every facet of his life.” — John Smeaton, Newcastle.
What did Ponting do wrong? He reported an example of racism — as captains have been asked to. His team celebrated an unlikely victory. I must have been watching a different match to Roebuck. I did not see a “pack of wild dogs” nor people who looked as though they were on drugs. These are disturbing metaphors to use about anyone. — Mark O’Sullivan Rosemeadow.
The headline above Roebuck’s article demands the sacking of Ricky Ponting “for the sake of our integrity”. Throughout the Test, the ABC radio commentary team, of which Roebuck is a member, constantly praised the quality of the cricket. Roebuck now proclaims that “in the past few days Ponting has presided over a performance that dragged the game into the pits”. Whose integrity is really at stake? Who should really be sacked? — Robert Radley, Springwood.