Darren Pattinson and Andy Murray - English sporting hypocrisy?

[smssia0112]

Two players, different sports, similar situations but contrasting reactions:

First off we have Darren Pattinson, a glorified Melburnian grade cricket bowler whose opportunity at state level was brought upon by Victoria having every single one of its contracted pace bowlers injured at one time, and in turn saw Nottinghamshire take advantage of his English passport, offering the Australian bred but England born bowler a spot on their list. Pattinson finds that English county cricket batsmen are much like his grade cricket opponents in Melbourne, and does extremely well, earning a shock call up to the English test team despite having no personal association to the country. But he accepts, because he will never get this opportunity for Australia, and a test is a test.

Our second story is that of Andrew Murray, a Scot who is quite good at tennis, and who plays for the fictional nation known as Great Britain or the United Kingdom, a magical land which probably existed in the past, but whose current status is an excuse for England to cling on to former glories. It is currently as useful as Atlantis. Nonetheless, Murray's stunning rise to the top 4 in the ATF rankings has seen him become "UK"s number 1 player (ever I might add, since he is the first Brit to make the final of a Grand Slam since Greg Rusedski), which England have once again taken advantage of. Apparently, despite the fact that they compete against each other and also hate each other in football, rugby, cricket, the Commonwealth Games and even lawn bowls, in tennis they are together.

So the reactions couldn't be more contrasting. On the one hand, you have the old mother creates son but umbilical cord is cut and the two are separated England-Australia rivalry, and on the other you have the cross-Kingdom local England-Scotland rivalry, and you have two sportsmen from two of England's sporting rivals, representing the Poms.

Pattinson was abused, shunned and cast out like a leper. Murray was praised, supported and welcomed with open arms like he was the Messiah, or at the very least Brian Cohen.

So my question - are England sporting fans hypocrites to accept one and not the other? Especially when you consider that Pattinson is England born and Murray is not.

Finally, I must say that that was an incredibly long thread about nothing.

 

[King Pietersen]

We rejected Pattinson because hes crap. Murrays class, and he played for Team GB at the olympics so we've got every right to support him. Also, what was all that crap about GB being a made up land? :/

 

[Leicester Fox]

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean Great Britain doesn't exist. Our government hardly says, oh lets not build any hospitals in Wales because Dean doesn't think they're connected to us. In case you hadn't noticed in individual sports people are called British and team sports English. Check out Lewis Hamilton. I know it upsets you because we dicked on you in the olympics but Britain really does exist.

It's good to know you spend so much of your free time obsessing over England though.

 

[smssia0112]

Just because you don't like it doesn't mean Great Britain doesn't exist. Our government hardly says, oh lets not build any hospitals in Wales because Dean doesn't think they're connected to us. In case you hadn't noticed in individual sports people are called British and team sports English. Check out Lewis Hamilton. I know it upsets you because we dicked on you in the olympics but Britain really does exist.

It's good to know you spend so much of your free time obsessing over England though.

I'm not saying it doesn't exist (maybe I am, but that's not important). I recognise that legally, Great Britain exists. What I am saying is that it is irrelevant in the modern day. England and Scotland are different countries.

As for your other point, it is not true that Great Britain is for individual sports people, there is an inconsistency there too. In the Commonwealth Games they compete separately, but in the Olympics they compete together. And my above, somewhat unconvincing example is the same, Lawn Bowls is an individual game which they compete in separate countries too.

This has nothing to do with the Olympics, I'm asking you why you bagged the crap out of an English test cricketer for not being English enough but you'll still embrace a guy who has less association with England. As for not being good enough, that's a bit rich considering your current pace attack.

And what on Earth does dicked on us mean?

 

[King Pietersen]

If Pattinson played well and actually warranted a place in the side we'd have accepted him, but he didn't.

I think this is just Deans attempt to make himself feel better about Australian sport. They had a poor Olympics by Aussie standards, they failed to win a rugby tournament that they've consistently won with ease, they've not got a class Tennis player, lost the last 2 Test series against decent opposition, they've lost an ODi series against a side hammered 4-0 by England, good time to be an Aussie sports fan =D

 

[smssia0112]

If Pattinson played well and actually warranted a place in the side we'd have accepted him, but he didn't.

I think this is just Deans attempt to make himself feel better about Australian sport. They had a poor Olympics by Aussie standards, they failed to win a rugby tournament that they've consistently won with ease, they've not got a class Tennis player, lost the last 2 Test series against decent opposition, they've lost an ODi series against a side hammered 4-0 by England, good time to be an Aussie sports fan =D

If results are all that matter, why do you love Stuart Broad so much?

And as for Australian sport, we may be losing to South Africa but we are still better than England, and the other sports may be annoyances when we lose or underperform, but they mean very little to me, especially the Rugby League World Cup, I laughed when Australia lost.

I don't feel bad about Australian sport, we've been a force in many major sports for most of my life, we may be having a lean period but I'm not worried. We will bounce back eventually, we didn't get to the top for nothing.

And as for tennis, you guys haven't had a number 1 in the history of the ATP tennis rankings, and we've had 3, equal second behind the US. Of course we can talk the current day, in which your great Scot hope was knocked out in the fourth round, whereas we have one in the quarter finals.

 

[King Pietersen]

It's only in Test cricket that Broad struggles He's got a fantastic OD record.

Where's this Australian in the quarter finals then? , also that was Murray's first loss of 2009, he's been far better than any Australian tennis player in the last year. He's got a fantastic record against Federer, pretty much the only player that's beaten Federer on a consistent basis over the past couple of years.

 

[smssia0112]

It's only in Test cricket that Broad struggles He's got a fantastic OD record.

Where's this Australian in the quarter finals then? , also that was Murray's first loss of 2009, he's been far better than any Australian tennis player in the last year. He's got a fantastic record against Federer, pretty much the only player that's beaten Federer on a consistent basis over the past couple of years.

Of course you only look to the male players, we have Jelena Dokic in the quarters, and her highest ranking is the same as Murray's, so she is as 'class' as he is.

And as for Broad, he has a fair record in ODI cricket but I would not call an average of 27 fantastic, but all that aside, the point is you still believe he can improve, but you did not afford Pattinson that chance despite great form leading up to the test.

And my main point is not performance, it's that Pattinson was labelled an outsider from the start by so many.

 

[Skater]

I remember reading it is actually England that 'doesn't exist', certainly not Great Britain or United Kingdom because my passport tells me it does.

The Australian in the quarter finals isn't Dokic, is it? Technically a Serbian who has adopted Australia.

 

[barmyarmy]

I'm not saying it doesn't exist (maybe I am, but that's not important). I recognise that legally, Great Britain exists. What I am saying is that it is irrelevant in the modern day. England and Scotland are different countries.

I think you'd need to live in England or Scotland at present to be able to make that statement. Somewhat harder to measure from Australia I would imagine.
I like your premise but I'm afraid KP has already hit it on the head. It's to do with ability not nationality.
I believe that Pattinson would have been abused had he been an English born-and-bred bowler for the simple reason he was jumped about 30 places up the queue and put onto a stage where he wasn't capable of performing.
A more interesting question is the English tendency to refer to Murray as British whereas Tim Henman was always English.
Regarding quickly the political situation here in Scotland, despite having a nationalist administration the possibility of independence has greatly receded due to the collapse of the two lynchpins of the Scottish economy - HBOS and RBS. It was incredibly embarassing for a nationalist administration who have used Iceland as their model of prosperity to have to admit that had Scotland been independent the government would have been unable to bail them out to the same extent and that they would probably have gone bust.
Incidentally I raised a glass last night to our national poet on his 250th birthday and I hope that any of you with Scots blood will take notice of our homecoming campaign and plan a visit sometime this year.

 

[smssia0112]

I remember reading it is actually England that 'doesn't exist', certainly not Great Britain or United Kingdom because my passport tells me it does.

The Australian in the quarter finals isn't Dokic, is it? Technically a Serbian who has adopted Australia.

Born in Serbia yes, but bred in Australia.

aus5892 added 2 Minutes and 49 Seconds later...

I think you'd need to live in England or Scotland at present to be able to make that statement. Somewhat harder to measure from Australia I would imagine.
I like your premise but I'm afraid KP has already hit it on the head. It's to do with ability not nationality.
I believe that Pattinson would have been abused had he been an English born-and-bred bowler for the simple reason he was jumped about 30 places up the queue and put onto a stage where he wasn't capable of performing.
A more interesting question is the English tendency to refer to Murray as British whereas Tim Henman was always English.
Regarding quickly the political situation here in Scotland, despite having a nationalist administration the possibility of independence has greatly receded due to the collapse of the two lynchpins of the Scottish economy - HBOS and RBS. It was incredibly embarassing for a nationalist administration who have used Iceland as their model of prosperity to have to admit that had Scotland been independent the government would have been unable to bail them out to the same extent and that they would probably have gone bust.
Incidentally I raised a glass last night to our national poet on his 250th birthday and I hope that any of you with Scots blood will take notice of our homecoming campaign and plan a visit sometime this year.

I'm interested to hear from you Colin. Are you actually Scottish born, are your parents Scottish etc? Or are you really English just living there or your heritage is English etc?

If you're the former, do you not feel more proud of a Scottish achievement than an English achievement under the banner of the UK?

Sure we can accept that the UK makes sense, certainly I may have underestimated its economical value, but are you all really prepared to say that a Scot is yours to barrack for? Personally I think you can't have it both ways, and in sport you English certainly overestimate its value.

I knew ability played a role, but there was plenty of Pattinson desecrated the English test team by not being English calls.

 

[King Pietersen]

I certainly didn't make those comments, as it would have been utter hypocrisy considering our best batsman was born and raised in South Africa, and didn't come over here until he was 21. Why does this thread come now as well? Why not 4-5 months ago when Pattinson actually played his Test match? =/

 

[Skater]

As far as I recall it wasn't the English saying Pattinson wasn't English, it was more Australians. It is a weak argument too since Pattinson was born in Grimsby. I am from the old school of thought in which your nationality is where you or your parents were born, not where you live.

 

[Precambrian]

:laugh Aussie-Pom bash thread?

 

[smssia0112]

I certainly didn't make those comments, as it would have been utter hypocrisy considering our best batsman was born and raised in South Africa, and didn't come over here until he was 21. Why does this thread come now as well? Why not 4-5 months ago when Pattinson actually played his Test match? =/

Because it's also about Murray obviously, right now you have Murray the big rising star and everyone in England taking credit for their great white hope.

And I definitely saw comments regarding Pattinson's nationality from former players and fans on here. Not just Australians.

aus5892 added 0 Minutes and 16 Seconds later...

I certainly didn't make those comments, as it would have been utter hypocrisy considering our best batsman was born and raised in South Africa, and didn't come over here until he was 21. Why does this thread come now as well? Why not 4-5 months ago when Pattinson actually played his Test match? =/

Because it's also about Murray obviously, right now you have Murray the big rising star and everyone in England taking credit for their great white hope.

And I definitely saw comments regarding Pattinson's nationality from former players and fans on here. Not just Australians.