“You never give up on your country; you let your country give up on you.”
Admittedly, this line is stolen from the famous ‘Smithy’ (James Corden) Sports Personality rant of 2009, but it does have a purpose in the context of the article. Is it ever justified to retire from international cricket halfway through an Ashes series, in the middle of a tour which seems to be headed towards a total whitewash?
Graeme Swann has made a number of remarks about England players being “up their own arses”. Swann has since clarified that these claims were not directed at current players. But in the aftermath of the comments Alistair Cook, England captain, has explained that Swann “has nothing left to give in this England shirt, which must be incredibly sad for someone who loves cricket as much as he does.” Far from shedding light on the situation, this cliché simply confuses matters.
Swann could have retired for a number of reasons. He has a history of elbow problems. He is famously outspoken and therefore could have fallen out with his teammates. However, he insists that he has not fallen out with his teammates partially by insisting the comments have nothing to do with Kevin Peterson, the most obvious candidate to be up his own arse.
So why is he retiring? Having “nothing left to give” does not really make sense as the answer. I could contribute to an England team – my contribution would just be awful. Swann could turn up, and bowl badly, and would still be giving something. As far as we are aware he is not injured. Whether he wants to do this or not is a different proposition. His performance throughout this Ashes series has been poor: 7 wickets for an average of 80 runs. It would be understandable if he wanted to call time before things got worse. We can all understand that on a personal level.
But there is a greater issue at stake here. England do not really have anyone to step into the breach, as the fourth test has shown. Monty Panesar’s second innings performance was unedifying to say the least, and there is no one else of Swann’s calibre to replace him.
Whilst, like everyone else in sport, Swann has the right to retire when he likes, there is a question of the greater good of the team. With no one else to replace him, Swann really should have stuck around, not because he was performing well, but in his capacity as a senior player it was his job to go out, even as things collapse around you, and resolve to play on, because that is what the team required of him. There is no getting around the fact that leadership qualities come out when the going is tough. On an abysmal tour, the capacity to keep going, and demonstrate to others that you will still keep fighting in a lost cause is what is required from a senior player.
Swann has the liberty to retire when he likes, and rightly so. However, he should have waited at least until the end of the tour because England have no one to replace him. Seniority comes at a cost, and throwing the towel in when you are performing badly is not something that can easily be excused. It is a poor end to a fine and enjoyable career.
