How else do you beat Oz at their own game

So, is Saurav Ganguly’s image Down Under as disruptive as the Australians would have us believe? They are past masters of this act and mouthing off as well as trying to cower their opponent in a corner and smile as they reap the benefits of success when having done so. Forget the preamble to the spirit of the game; forget Law 1, which outlines a captain’s duties to fairplay, and Law 42, which enforces a captain’s role. The Aussies have been doing it for years.

It is like a barroom brawl in the open; a verbal shakedown to unsettle the opposition and make them feel they don’t quite belong on the same stage. It is the image from which the term ‘‘Ugly Australian’’ is derived and projected through a vocal yobbo swipe at the covenants of the laws which monitor such unruly behaviour.

Such behaviour has, in fact, been part of the Australian psyche since the 1960s. At a club match at the Bradman Oval in Bowral between Moss Vale and Bowral Union in 1965, where this writer was umpire, a bouncer had the batsman ducking into the ball. There was a flurry of angry words and, as the batsman was helped off, the next batsman found himself standing in the pool of blood caused by the wound to his fallen comrade.

A suggestion to the umpiring colleague at square leg that we get some sawdust to cover up the blood met with a firm refusal from the fielding captain. When the ethics of Law 42 were pointed out, and that the umpire had the final say, the fielding captain — with disgruntled reluctance — allowed the bloody patch to be covered.

After that the bowlers and fieldsmen appealed with vociferous malice every chance they had, demanding an answer when each appeal was turned down. It became unpleasant and ugly and openly abusive when the bowler who delivered the bouncer was finally no-balled for dangerous bowling and the captain told his prized pace weapon could not bowl again in the innings.

The moral of this story is that it is in the power of the umpire, under the ICC playing conditions, to caution a player for abusive, rude behaviour. The question asked, though, is why is it only players from the sub-continent targeted when it comes to TV misdemeanours of so-called ball tampering and other behaviour? Is this designed to show up how good are the opponents who are never caught do the same thing? Or is this done to make players from the four South Asian nations appear as cheats?

Cricket Australia has enforced a code of conduct to clean up part of the game but it becomes a farce when it is suggested that a player is misbehaving and is given a dressing down for sticking out a tongue at a departing batsman. Or offers a few amusing verbal comments. Are we not in danger of turning the game into a sport for sissies?

Mike Procter, match referee for the often ill-tempered Test series last year between Australia and the West Indies, felt that umpire David Shepherd handled the McGrath/Ramnaresh Sarwan incident pretty well. He called on captain Steve Waugh to whip his players into line ad reprimanded him for failing to exercise control.

Sure Ganguly has come across as a typical ugly Aussie and fronting up to them as part of a psychological battle. Playing the game in Australia is not a picnic, or for sissies, and at some stage of this tour, where India have earned much credit for their ability and skills, it was going to be a matter of going over the top at times in support of the team and players.

It is also up to the match referee, in this case Clive Lloyd, and the umpires to control the game. How much leeway they give Ganguly is up to them. He is, after all, the tough image of a captain who has earned praise from both Brian Lara and Steve Waugh. If India win the VB series, he will be a hero not a villain.