Crash Craddock: Just how committed are Australia players to creating a positive change?

DID the dog eat their homework? With just 48 current players completing the ethics review survey, it pays to ask how committed our cricketers are to helping clean up Australia’s sullied image, writes Robert Craddock.

Former Australia coach Mickey Arthur (L) famously axed four players for not doing assigned homework. Picture: Getty

• Analysis: ‘arrogant, controlling’ CA won’t budge on bans
• ‘Elitist’ CA accused of ‘sweeping issues under rug’

HEY, Mickey Arthur. What was that you were saying about homework?

Hidden beneath the seemingly unified push to make Australia a better-behaved cricket nation lay the curious fact that when researchers were diving deep for answers to the malaise, most players were not interested – or could not be bothered – in talking about it.

Of around 150 current players sent the ethics review survey only 48 completed it.

It’s not the end of the world but it’s poor. So poor, in fact, the lack of response is almost as relevant as the replies because it radiates a sense of indifference to the project.

That survey, awkward as some players found it, was one of the most significant pieces of paperwork those players would receive from Cricket Australia, who deserved the decent whack that came their way.

Former Australia coach Mickey Arthur (L) famously axed four players for not doing assigned homework. Picture: Getty

While the results were being unveiled in Melbourne, somewhere in Dubai, Arthur would have been enjoying his breakfast bacon and eggs as if they were caviar and champers after the Pakistan team he coached finished a 3-0 T20 series win over Australia after their 1-0 victory in the Tests.

Arthur, who has done an exceptional job with a team forced to play its games abroad, was brutally sacked as Australian coach a few months after dropping four players in India for not doing team homework.

He reckoned the team was getting slack and not doing the little things that tie a side together.

His view cost him his job yet, five years later, as he celebrated in Dubai, there were signs of the old loose threads unravelling and some people who sanctioned his sacking now feel he had a point.

This time it won’t cost any player anything but it does raise the question of how deeply committed the players are to the push to spring clean Australia’s sullied cricketing image.

If players reckon there was an unfair win at all costs attitude coming from above in Cricket Australia, that’s fine. If they thought winning bonuses were complete crap, that’s most understandable.

But if you are not prepared to take a few minutes out of your day – actually your extended off-season – to vent your frustration over any of these, you wonder how deeply you really feel about them.

The survey has worked against the chances of David Warner and Steve Smith getting an early recall from their year bans despite a looming players’ union protest.

Tim Paine (L) outlined the teams new standards. Picture: AFP

Cricket Australia can point to the fact that most players who did respond to the survey agreed with the bans and if the others were so outraged about it, why didn’t they say so?

Administrators can pound the pulpit as much as they like but the success of any renewed push for the spirit of cricket rests squarely on the shoulders of the players.

Passion tends to be at its strongest at the start of projects.

If player commitment is patchy now, how will it be when the battle starts?

The most significant part of the review is Australia is now a prisoner of its own improved standards.

The bar has been lifted. The standard has been set.

Now, can anybody bat?

Factors that contributed to Sandpapergate

A brutal report into Cricket Australia's culture makes for ugly reading for the game's bosses

Lack of maturity of judgement

The player bubble, lack of a worldly perspective and sense of entitlement brought on by pay dispute.

Lack of Consequences or Understanding of Consequences

Cricket Australia’s failure to implement disciplinary measures in response to prior poor on-field and off-field behaviour. Revelation staff were abused by players on match day while performing duties.

Fear of Speaking Up

Aggressive tactics from CA management that turned players off “calling out” inappropriate behaviour

Aggressive tactics

Defined by the MOU war between CA and the ACA and CA’s contempt for prospective broadcast partners in media rights negotiations contributing to a toxic culture.

* 38 passages of the cultural review were redacted, removing names of key figures to protect CA from defamation.

* Only 48 players, at a staggeringly low 29 per cent, could be bothered to respond to the survey of one of the most important documents in the game's history

*42 recommendations in the 145 page report

*12-month bans for Steve Smith and David Warner, and nine-month ban for Cameron Bancroft will stand

Originally published as Crash Craddock: Just how committed are Australia players to creating a positive change?