While Australia was being beaten by India, Australian broadcasters were saying seriously that Ashwin, the best off-spinner in the game, was learning from Lyon, who may be Australia`s best, but obviously not as good as Ashwin, and that Yadav, who has played more games than Cummings, and looks likely to be soon among the best quicks, was learning from the new, raw kid, Cummings. It sounded surreal. When the Australian captain looked to his bench to get a clue as to whether a review was warranted, the Indian captain acted as if Smith’s conduct was among the most dishonest performances he had ever seen in the game of cricket, instead of using the occasion as an opportunity to point to the absurdity of the limitations on DRS review. The quality of the cricket was decent, but the atmosphere did not seem healthy to me. A few of the players and most of the broadcasters either acted hypocritically or as if the series were a clash of civilizations.
Unfortunately, home advantage also seems too often to play a disproportionate role in the results, especially in the longer form of the game, which is also lionized by traditionalists as if it were some higher form of sport, although logic and fan support suggest a different attitude ought to be adopted by those in charge in the best interests of the game.
Cricket needs a great deal of shaking up, including unlimited DRS in all formats, new balls every 60 overs in 5 day cricket, more participation by coaches during games, less time-wasting by players and constant reminders that cricket, in all its forms is entertainment.