Michael what did you really expect? When my fellow countrymen actually lose a sporting contest then there is 3 typical reactions.
1) Try and blame absolutely anything on the loss except the possible thought that the opposition may have played better or even worse may BE better.
2) Incite some earlier incident or injustice to take attention away from the fact that Australia actually lost.
3) Put absolutely any other kind of news in place and just glaze over the loss and then pretend it never happened.
So this is a prior warning. Expect all 3 reactions in the Australian media just don't expect much grace or respect for the opposition or any actual facts. Real cricket followers may know that we have been systematically dismantled in this test regardless of the end result, but this is generally a nation of fairweather fans. If Australia doesn't win, then we just don't want to know.

We are waiting and watching...waiting to see what screamy headline the Aus media will offer if Aus lose the match. It might be a bit of a relief if they somehow pull off a historic chase and Punter fuh-gets about it, but that looks highly unlikely as of now. I assure you lots of Indians here were going, "Look who's talking" when sections of the Aus media accused Ganguly of "denying" Aus a victory in Bangalore. Says a lot about Australian optimism, but little else, when one considers that all of 10 overs were available to Aus when play was called off. I don't claim that the Indian media is much better, they are probably worse because they still lack the sophistication to disguise their deep-seated prejudice as sharp "analysis". But whatever, why is it such a compulsion for both sides to accuse each other of being whingey? I mean, is ICC giving out a Whingey cricket team of the year award or something and are the respective media sections "lobbying" for it? Yay to that, then!

finally somebody from cricinfo has cottoned on to malcolm and his conning ways!
i read the same article and had an almost exactly similar reaction to you, michael! (except that it was probably less moderate!)
if you go through the archives of all malcolm conn's posts - especially those of india's tour there - you will see that this is not an isolated incident.
good on you, for bringing this to public notice!

All one can say is that bragging rights will be with whichever team is winning..So save it till the end of the series

All hacks are the same - making stuff up on a slow news day especially when Australia is getting clobbered. Hardly worth a blog to comment on or are you sucking up to your Indian readers after your last couple of blogs?

Here's another one from today's Courier Mail which is the main newspaper in Queensland. The correspondent (Jon Pierik) refers to the so-called rejoicing in the press box in Mohali last night. His words go something like this:

"There are more 'fans' than journalists working in this part of the world at times, but the message on this occasion was unmistakably clear". End of quote.

Obviously no other part of the world has journalists who rejoice in their country's performances? Indian journalists have been singled out for being 'fans' rather than proper journalists. I'm sure that sort of comment will go down a treat in the press box in Mohali and subsequent venues in Delhi and Nagpur! This journo might find that famed Indian hospitality might dry up a bit. After all, they're not fellow journalists in the press box with him, just lowly fans with pens and laptops and careers!

There will always be bias on media reports - whatever nation it belongs. But Australian media seems to have gone too far. I can recall the article in Fox news during an IPL win of Chennai Superkings. Hussey made run a ball 42 on that match and Dhoni exploded in final overs to make 49 with just 30 balls (figures may be approx). The article simply mentioned Hussey took the team to win , and never mentioned Dhoni's name at all. It is understandable that too much of winning streaks turned Aussie media intolerant to losses and negative news , far more than their fans. Guess whats tomorrow's headline , even if India win today itself ? "Sehwag refuse to walk away for the nick"

This is nothing compared to the "serial offender" comment on Ganguly. In both the test matches India's over rate is better than Australia and yet Indian is accused of using delaying tactics. As if Australia would have got those 7 wickets in the 3 minutes wasted by Ganguly. And what would you say about Watson stopping in his run-up so often this morning.
Anyway, this is understandable. We have some similar biased journalism in India as well. (The guys who praised Kumble for that "only one team was playing with spirit" comment. I never understand what Kumble was complaining about.)
The umpiring in this series is again sub-standard; but since both the teams have benefited (or suffered) equally, chances are it would go unnoticed and un-reported.

I do not know what the print media is like in other countries but in Australia it is a joke and the headline you refer to is a prime example. They will latch on to any minor "controversy" and blow it out of proportion in the hope of selling a few more papers, at the expense of talking about the actual cricket. Thank you for this post Michael, hopefully those who write these terrible reports will read this and feel ashamed of their "work".

Rather a hysterical piece. That the umpires felt it necessary to intervene might of course mean that the "friendly banter" was over the top. That Watson didn't whine about it off-field might be because he believes in leaving these things on the field. I don't know - just saying you can't pick and choose which things to take at face value and which to reject. Incidentally, there was plenty of mention in the Australian media of the Watson LBW.

Sure it looks pretty bad for Australia in this test and probably for the rest of the series and so credit should be given to India for being the better team if they win. Having said that though I'm terribly disappointed with the selections of late for the Aus test team. Noffke isn't even on the tour, Siddle is getting picked ahead of Bollinger and is Cameron White supposed to be our specialist spinner (ie Ponting doesn't seem in a hurry to give him a decent amount of overs)? Krezja was supposed to be backup behind McGain but we saw how bad his tour match went, in addition to his mediocre domestic record. Jacques was dropped after performing well in the West Indies (Katich should be in the team but not as a replacement for Jacques - perhaps for Symonds). Also what happened to Beau Casson? - he seemed to do ok (only got 1 test though). Yes this is all just an excuse, but as a competitive Aussie I just won't agree that India is the better side despite the likelihood of winning.

I'm an Aussie; I'm not whingeing. We are being beaten by a team that is playing considerably better cricket. A golden age of Australian cricket has probably passed, but it doesn't mean we can't appreciate the efforts of those who are taking the places of the giants whom we have been privileged to see, nor that we can't appreciate the efforts of those who are doing a great job of beating our team! It's a very impressive performance by India, both batting and bowling. So don't worry too much about the whingeing of journalists - they're paid to do it. The rest of us are just watching and appreciating - and feeling a little sorry for our countrymen who are on the end of a drubbing.

Geoff, Let me tell you that it not just australia its almost every country. Its Human Psyche... Wins are celibrated and no one wants to talk about losses.
Michael Newspaper all over world do it.. its there business. Who will read the article otherwise.

Every country from history played biased and every media looks at copy. People who are mature will read & ignore it and don't go into war (of words or weapons) I said mature so I will leave it to readers to decide whether they are mature or not to take things sportingly and maturely. play well, fight hard, try to win without malice using just and fair means makes a sportsman and better human being. ever country, selection, playing, emotion, drama, mistakes, bias are all part of life and fight it fairly where we can and just hope for justice but enjoy the game and life goes on. But show some maturity in dealing with it be it win or loss. Short sighted comments, out burst, ego bordering on megalomania selfishness and greed and violence without a thought for fellow humans is what the world is doing even in sports. No peace no tolerance and even in these blogs it reflects. enjoy the good ball good shot good catch not blow things out of proportion and make it bigger thing that that please

Dude, please don't characterise Aussies by the stupidity of our Murdoch press. I think enough international cricket fans are anti-Aussie as it is.

I am more happy to see Inida scripting a great win over Aussie! I care less what the Australian press is writing. My game finishes when the last ball is bowled and thats what I care. Damn the media!

This is really funny. I had no idea the Aussie media has such characters, hahaha. I guess mediamen are the same everywhere...anything that sells huh? Our Indian media is no less pathetic but every country's media has different ways of embarrassing itself and its fair-minded readers.

Michael, just a follow up on the hypocrisy followed by aussie cricketers...you could also comment on the shouts by Ponting to Sehwag today when he was out but not given. An Aussie who openly never walks when out (everyone knows it's their policy), asking other players to walk is incredibly hypocritical, not to speak of lacking any shame whatsoever. He always has been a whinger...whenever he has lost, he has never given credit by admitting that they were beaten by a better team on the day. I also think your statement that the teams are evenly matched is utter codswallop...anyone who has seen the matches knows that this Indian team is far superior thatn THIS Aussie team. I expect India to win the series at least 2-0. By the way, I agree totally with Paul that you're writing this article especially to "make up" to the Indian readers...of which I'm one!

I hope that our beloved cricket fans do not read much into the things said by the Australian media. The truth is that every newspaper tends to be biased. Let's face it, the same is the case with Australian, Indian, and the newspapers in other countries. It is in the best interest of the game for people to ignore such comments and focus on the game. Common people, we have a series in progress, why waste our energy in focussing on useless issues when the concerned sportsmen themselves are not interested in it. Let us enjoy the game and let off-field issues be off field issues.

Well put, Michael. This sort of hypocrisy and jingoism is typical of the Australian media and too many of us blindly accept it. Incidents like these only serve to make Aussies seem backward, ill-educated and arrogant. Regardless of what "other countries" do, there is serious room for improvement in our standards of sporting journalism.

Who believes the murdoch press they are neither Indian nor Australian they carter for the right wing in both countries.Herald Sun in aus and star group in India.

i think sehwag should have walked .not that it made much of a difference to the total score but
still as an indian fan it was not a very good sight

Michael, kudos to you for daring to comment on the Aussie bias. I am sure Ponting will come out and talk about the Sehwag nick during the post-match ceremony, conveniently forgetting Sydney and other instances. They like to take the moral high ground, dont they, the aussies? Only, they do it from low ground so the whole world laughs at them - by being thick enough not to register that, they overcome the shame. Quite a gift, I must say.

come on ! we have seen much worse headlines in india

Mr Jeh you seem to be struggling for material? Another B grade blog.

I have to agree with John here. Sensationalist Murdoch press is designed to generate a reaction and further its own interest and sales. That, rather than Australia's losses, is what people should really ignore.
BTW, I also agree Australia's golden era is long gone,although I wasn't too plussed when we use to thrash teams in non-competitive matches. I just hope we don't become like the West Indies after their golden era finished...
Still, I think South Africa should become #1 soon and maybe Kallis (has many runs and can also take many wickets) can finally make runs in OZ and overtake Ponting at the same time.

Cricinfo linking to The Australian and The Australian linking to cricinfo (thru ball by ball score of current test match). That tells what is really behind such headlines and all the different whingeing strokes of cricinfo..??

If you really want to keep what cricinfo is, do not try such timid ways to turn internet traffic for more money.

This is by FAR, by miles and miles, the most balanced series of comments, from both Aussie and Indian fans I've ever read on a blog post since monkeygate. Well done Michael Jeh, well done fans. I'm finally convinced that there are enough true fans on both sides of the hysteria to have meaningful cricketing discussions with, and the experience of watching these wonderful contests wll only be the better for it.

The other wonderful thing about this post is it brings to light the truly atrocious, so-called "Journalism" of Mr.Malcolm Conn. He is, to paraphrase another fine gent, a serial offender, and I'm truly glad it's an aussie who's called him out on it. I have a lot of respect for many many aussie cricketers, commentators, writers and, after the comments on this post, fans, but Malcolm Conn is the sort of guy who can give an entire country a bad name. As another commenter pointed out, this article is a mere drop in a very wide cesspool of similar articles. He should be out of a job.

You critisize the Australian press for harsh and selective headlines and articles against the Indians, but extending that reasoning I find your critcism equally selective and harsh, are you telling me the Indian press do not employ the same kind of tactics against other teams, probably most noteably against Pakistan(anyone remember the shocking alleging headlines post woolmers death), but increasingly against Australia (there 'new' rivals) - infact the English press is probably the same with regards Australia and other impressive touring sides. All three nations I would describe as having powerful 'international' press and often use this irresponsibly with misleading headlines and articles.

Maybe the headlines will be
Umpire to be dropped from next test,following complaint by Australian Cricket Board

Pigs might fly.

The Australian is one of the worst newspapers. The Age and SMH are not quite so bad.

Look, there's always going to journos like Conn everywhere even in India. These guys have nothing more to do than create fancy headlines to stir the pot. There arent too many people in the media today who can remain largely unbiased. In that respect, I've gotta take my had off to the ABC radio commentary team of Jim Maxwell, Peter Roebuck and co. Its been such a pleasure listening to them that I watch the game with the sound muted on fox and the radio on......

Speaking about Murdhoch's influence, Who do you think owns cricinfo now? Mr.Murdoch is only laughing his way into the bank with the amount of site traffic

Being a practicing Indian cricket fan in Australia, I know the joy of having to find out via the media what's going on in Indian cricket. Can I just say that the media is a BUSINESS. Its their job to make things sound worse than they are because it makes people read it. I think though that the point about the Indian press is that they spend more time attacking each other and the Indian players rather than worrying about opposition. Apparently the job of the Indian cricket fan (much like the England football fan) is to jeer your own team. Even on Cricinfo, we have had glowing words about Mishra and Ishant and even Zaheer but Geoffrey Boycott in his podcast still gets to get stuck into Yuvraj Singh. The article is really quite sad as it sets out a non-existent feud and hopefully people around the world will be saved the humiliation of believing it...

Come on fellas, get off your high horses. Massaging facts to create angles that appeal to a newspaper's audience goes on around the world, particularly with sport. How often have you seen a humble article extolling the virtues of the opposing nation who just whipped the pants off a newspaper's home side? It's the job of these papers to be parochial. Otherwise, they simply wouldn't sell papers to the people that matter most - the paying customer. As was pointed out, the internet headline was more balanced, and quite rightly so. The angle changes to suit the medium and audience. Makes sense to me.

By marking this as an Australian-centric media trait it shows that a lot of people here are ignorant of the way the print media works or are in denial about the (quite rightly) slanted coverage of sporting events in their own national media. Just take the incredibly one-eyed coverage of India's Sydney Test match loss by the Indian broadcast & internet-based hacks. Now THAT was biased!

In response to what Neil said, it might be the end of the "golden era" for Australia but I certainly don't see them sinking to West Indian lows anytime soon because the system is so consistent and strong over there. West Indian and Pakistani brilliance will always be a freakish happenstance rather than a result of methodical organisation, their peaks are breathtaking and the troughs run really deep. It would be fair to assert that Australia is no longer the #1 side in the world only once they lose a series at home. The upcoming SA series could be where the passing of the baton happens just as it was passed from the West Indies to Australia in 1995. But SA have always played very timidly against Oz, so we can't be too confident about their chances.

Dunno, what the fuss is about. A newspaper strives to sell itself. It's not new for a newspaper to distort facts to sell a few extra copies of itself. It's not the aussies alone..even the indian media does create a mountain out of a molehill.

Just enjoy the game, folks!

Ok . Too much of discussions. As Ambuj points out, Lets continue to enjoy the 'wits' of Malcom conn as well as other country's media persons.
Here is the latest masterpiece of him:
"It is the most undeniable sign yet that the invincible aura of this once mighty side has been wiped away by a string of retiring champions and underperforming stars."
Well , i wonder whether "mighty once team " and "string of retiring champions and underperforming stars" means different things! Both teams are in almost same phase Mr Malcom.

Thanks for making this into light Micheal. I enjoy this !

Malcolm Conn and Peter Lalor need to be given jobs in Times of India. These 2 are terrific on there coverages of matches involving Australia and twist comments and scenarios for a one-sided and wrong story. Entertaining stories and funny fiction. They would also have a great career in the soap opera's being churned out in Indian television involving daughter-in-laws and mother-in-laws.

Headlines like the one observed by the writer Michael Jeh is nothing unusual. Journalists just like any other human beings do not see an event without any perception of their own. It is their perspective that creates debates with others. After the test in Bengaluru, I noticed articles from two different websites. One focused on Ricky Ponting's assertion that India played negatively while the other focused on Zaheer Khan's assertion that Australia were guilty in negative play. In any case, I observed the whole match and realised that both played negatively given by their standards but then this was a tricky enough pitch and there were still 3 tests to play. Regarding this match, like it is said in soccer, the table doesn't lie. When the match has finished, only then can we analyse (hopefully in a balanced way) how the match was won and lost. In the meantime let us laugh and put aside media sensationalisms!

The author has an incredibly short memory. In regards to the subsequent post he made about Jon Pierik's article about the Indian media, Pierik is absolutely correct. I was appalled at the reaction of the Indian media during Kumble's post-match press conference in Sydney. When he made his absurd comment about his team was the only one who played the match in the spirit of the game, the Indian media broke out into rapturous applause. Fair and balanced? Not quite. At least Australia isn't trying to remove Rudi Koertzen from ever umpiring a match for them ever again for not referring a stumping, unlike the humiliating treatment the BCCI brought towards Steve Bucknor. Everyone forgets that the BCCI was under heavy criticism up until the final day in Sydney for not preparing a proper itinerary to get their players acclimatized to Australian conditions, which was largely responsible for losing the first two tests. The Indian media jumped on the poor umpiring to take attention away from that.

Australian Media is a joke.
They do not enough guts to accept defeat again
and again by the Indians...

The writer I like to read is Peter Roebuck and a guy whose opinion I respect is Ian Chappel. When I was growing up in the early 80's the only cricket I listened to was ABC radio, with Jim Maxwell and (I forget his name now). That was the Australia of Alderman and Lillee, when the cricket world had 5 strong teams, not just 2 (or 3, counting SA). Tony Cozier was marvelous to listen to. My point is radio and print does have many fine gentlemen in it, and thank heaven for them, and for those like Conn, history will treat them a little differently, and no one will be talking about him in 20 years or so, and I suppose there is justice in that.

Following on from my earlier post the two commentators on ABC were Jim Maxwell and Tim Lane.
I remember that one or the other would take opposite sides when it came to controversial moments and decisions. That is why it was fun to listen to them, and I did all the way from 1981 right up to 1995 in the West Indies when the Aussies finally beat them under Mark Taylor. Those were great days.

To be fair to Malcolm Conn though, the headline may not necessarily have been his words. He may have written the article but somebody else may have posted the headline. The fact that the hard copy headline was different to the online headline suggests that a sub-editor may have done Conn no favours in this regard. I still don't agree with much of his content but the headline thing may not be his doing. For example, each piece I write for this blog has no headline or title. Someone from Cricinfo editorial staff put in the headline of their choice. So when people sometimes get hot under the collar about inflammatory headlines, it is not always the author's words.
Today's Australian newspaper had Hayden "given out leg before". By using the words "given out" or "adjudged", the seeming insinuation is that it wasn't really out but that the umpire made a mistake perhaps. Why not just say "Hayden was out lbw" unless those words were deliberately chosen to suggest some doubt?

This is a joke, the Age headline is completely normal fare for print media & is no worse than your own Michael.
And I agree with aravindhr, it is so refreshing to see so little hysteria in the comments from both sides. Except for raj & Mohit Suryawanshi who both seem to forget the Indians complaining about Aussies not walking not so long ago.

Michael I'm glad you qualified your article by conceeding the possibility that Conn did not create the title. I remember the writer of a blog in the Inbox of this site coming in for heavy criticism for their title when it was created by the criciinfo staff. In response to the "adjudged" statement about Hayden's LBW, the ball did not strike the pad fully in line. There was no doubt the ball would have hit the stumps, but since a portion of the ball was outside the line, the umpire adjudged it out. Rauf could have given it not out if he was unsure, and after Rudi missing the Watson/Sharma LBW you never know if they've changed the rules overnight.

Come on Michael, your pieces have always seemed fairly balanced but on this occasion it appears to be the old pot calling the kettle black.
Whether true or not, you could well be accused here of writing an article that panders to the majority Indian visitors to this site. This is no different to the likelihood that individual journalists are under pressure to write what News Limited decides Australian readers wish to hear.
The most impressive thing here, whether by careful vetting of posts or sensible posters, is the generally mature response to the article.
In the middle of a so far brilliant performance by the Indian team why peddle this rubbish?

Michael,

I am very glad that you wrote this article. We had disagreements with your previous India-Australia articles, but this one is spot on. I am sure most Australians are great folks and they are mis-represented by their media. For instance, Ponting was all grace and classy after the defeat and so were the other team members.

After last year's Academy awards, one headline in an Australian paper's web-edition read "OUR Oscar winner causes a stir in US" (capitalization is mine). This was referring to an actress who had called Bush and Cheney 'War-mongers'. I am not getting into the appropriateness of her statement, but the headline was so cheesy and and pathetically jingoistic. Many people, here in the US, wonder why the Australian-export Mr.Rupert Murudoch's FOX news is beneath deplorable. I guess, if they understand his competition down-under when he started out, Americans would see why.

Well, that's Malcolm Conn for you !He might as well call himself Malcolm "Con"