Richard Boock: Bury your rubbish Australia

COMMENT

New Zealand's first-test defiance has been comfortably matched by an Australian display of insufferable hypocrisy.

A day after the visitors began their war of attrition against the word champions, they awoke to read that they were not only on the ropes in terms of the test match, but had also broken an unspoken understanding on the issue of walking.

Hours later they were standing in stunned bemusement as Australian opening batsman Justin Langer was caught behind off second-day hero Jacob Oram, but given not out by non-plussed umpire Aleem Dar - even though television replays revealed an edge.

It was a delicious irony after almost every major Australian paper carried the story of Mathew Sinclair standing his ground the previous day, despite an apparent pact that rival players would accept each other's word on claimed catches.

Sinclair had waited for the umpire's decision because he was unsure if Ricky Ponting had taken the catch, and said he was unaware of an Australian agreement that batsmen would walk on the basis of a nod and a wink.

The surprise was, in this land of ruthless opportunism, that he even had to defend himself.

Comforting, isn't it? That the team who effectively pillaged and plundered their way to the top, taking no prisoners along the way, are now claiming the moral high ground; masquerading as the Guardians of Spirit, no less.

Pinch me, someone.

Next we'll be hearing John Howard lecturing on open immigration, Wayne Carey speaking on fidelity, and George Gregan talking about the virtues of silence.

If it weren't so funny it would be serious.

Possibly the most amusing aspect is that the Australian cricket fraternity are so oblivious to the duplicity of their stance, that they don't even realise that the rest of the world is laughing at them.

These people seem to have forgotten that Australia have pushed the envelope throughout their history, probably doing more to damage the spirit of the game than any other nation, and frequently asserting their right to play to the letter of the law.

Technology was introduced mainly so the rest of the world could prise their batsmen from the crease.

Never mind Martin Snedden's claimed catch of Greg Chappell in 1981, the small matter of the underarm incident the same year, Greg Dyer's deception a few years later, and Australia's go-slow against the West Indies in 1999.

Put aside the memory of New Zealand's previous test at the Gabba in 2001, when Australia averted defeat only because Glenn McGrath bowled about half a metre wide of the stumps.

And forget for a minute Michael Slater's unforgivable display in Mumbai the same year, when he claimed a catch and was then exposed by television replays.

So what if Langer and Ponting escaped dismissal by standing their ground in similar circumstances against the West Indies and Zimbabwe respectively?

So what if Steve Waugh told his batsmen to never walk?

That was just history, after all.

The idea that now Australia have become the superpower of world cricket, everyone should accept their word on matters of honour and start paying more attention to the game's unwritten code, needs to be viewed for what it is - fatuous nonsense.

But even more comical is the thought that Langer's bluff probably won't make any difference to the Aussies, who have bought into this evangelical crusade while apparently overlooking the two-facedness of their own position.

One imagines that, if they ever start losing again, they'll immediately return to type.