Why should Warnie wear all the blame?

Now, I'm not very good at reading lips, but I have no doubt that in the heat of the moment they don't, whether I can hear it or not. And in those (silent) cases it's broadcast in full, sometimes repeatedly. The commentators have even been known to refer to lip-reading the exchanges. Why delude ourselves that it's not happening?

We can't expect athletes of any kind to construct full sentences and carefully articulate their feelings during a match. One of the best ways to express frustration, which they all must feel at some stage, is an expletive (or a string of them). I know one of those always makes me feel better after I've stubbed my toe yet again on the same corner of the kitchen table.

That's not to say that there isn't a time and a place for it. If Warnie had been in the outfield no-one would have noticed, much less been offended. If Warnie had waited until a drinks break or at least and ad break, the public would have been none the wiser.

Of course, the "Captain Grumpy" incident, in which Allan Border notoriously berated a player for dissent, shows that the media can record much more than events near the stumps. "Cameraman Joe" provided further evidence of this, so where and when is the correct "time and place"?

As for the "role model" argument - I'd rather model my children's behaviour on an elite athlete who expresses himself openly and honestly (with discretion) and persists and triumphs than on one who bottles up their emotions and puts on a façade for public display. That's the kind of person I try to be and I'd like my kids to be the same.

Greg Chappell's account of the frustrations he felt on the day of the under-arm bowling incident shed a whole new light on the events of that day. I wonder whether his decision, and public reaction to it, would have been different had he not been quite so frustrated.

Besides, at least Warnie's latest boo-boo has given us something to talk about besides the virtues of our invincible cricket team. One thing I hate much more than public profanity is public vanity. The public posturing and arrogance of Olympic basketball's "Dream Team" was far more offensive than Warnie's outburst. At least it's not the Australian cricketers who are talking themselves up - it's the same media pundits who lambasted Shane Warne.

So, what to do about it?? Well, I'm open to suggestions, but I'd recommend that each of the parties involved do one thing each to improve things in future:

The broadcaster: Get used to it. Things like this are going to happen and you are in the best position to prevent it becoming an issue - over microphones or in pictures;

The critics: Get over it. It's a callous, unrealistic world where a bloke can't express his frustrations without being howled at. And finally;

Warnie (and Glen McGrath): be a bit more careful, son!