The thing about cricket in Australia is that it’s very white. I know, I know, I say that about everything (true but!) Just stick with me here. Cricket is verrrrrry white. More-so than other (well-loved) sports in this country.

Yes, it’s played in South Asia and the Caribbean (which is a thread in itself!) but I’m talking about cricket specifically here in Oz and more specifically in Sydney communities.
For some context. I grew up in Western Sydney and I have Lebanese heritage. This is important to note because growing up I didn’t know a single Lebanese-Australian person - kid, adult, man or woman - who played, watched or talked about cricket. ZERO.
Cricket was never on in our home (several reasons for that) and nor was it ever on in the homes of anyone I ever visited. EVER. This is not an exaggeration.
To give you an example of how much I did not know about cricket, I only heard of Richie Benaud when he died. (To be fair, I knew Steve and Mark Waugh because they were from Bankstown and sometimes in the local Torch newspaper. Also, I knew Shane Warne because of hair-loss ads).
I couldn’t tell you if cricket was even offered at my (all-girls) high school because the wog kids never played it. But more than that. It wasn’t even on our radar as a sport at all.
If it was offered at our brother-school I also wouldn’t have known because not a single guy I hung out with played it, watched it or spoke about it. (And yes, I hung out with wog boys who had cars and paid for my McDonalds LIKE GENTLEMEN!)
I’ve often wondered why cricket was just never a thing in the Leb community and I have a few initial thoughts. Open for discussion as always. And to be clear this is MY experience in the 90s and Naughts. This is NOT shade on the game or Cricket Aus so nobody @ me goshdarnit.
First, cricket, through no fault of its own, is inherently exclusionary to new migrant communities, particularly those who don’t have South Asian backgrounds.
Unlike say soccer, cricket is just not played in countries like Lebanon. Lebanese migrants will have likely never heard of it so when considering the sports they enrol their kids in, cricket probably ain’t it.
This flows on culturally. No shade on old-school Leb dads - love em, they’re the best, etcetera - but in the 90s those brothers weren’t playing ANY sport with their kids in the backyard let alone a sport they’d never heard of.
So a love of cricket is not nurtured from childhood in a way that it might be with white/Anglo kids whose parents know and love the game. Two, for new migrant communities, test cricket is actually very difficult to follow.
There are a lot of numbers on the TV screen, which sounds like a joke complaint but if you’ve never heard of the game, can’t speak the language and you see a screen riddled with figures that no one has ever told you about it’s unlikely to entice you to keep watching.
Also, there’s no quick pay off in test cricket, unlike say basketball where there’s a goal every few mins. You can watch and enjoy a b'ball game without being familiar with it because you get to watch people score often and that’s sometimes enough. Cricket is a slow burn.
Three, the language barrier is real. Because test cricket is so long and slow (I promise this isn’t shade) the commentary is part of the experience but again if you don’t speak the language you won’t benefit from the background chat. It actually becomes a hindrance.
Four, cricket has got some strong community competition. Rugby league and soccer had a much stronger hold in the western suburbs when I was growing up. Community clubs were everywhere (rugby league more than soccer but shout out to Marconi under 18s dance parties).
I’m pretty sure footballers came to our school once. Homes and cars would be covered in blue and white if the Bulldogs made it to the grand final. People went round for an afternoon and watched football. Ain’t nobody going round for THREE WEEKS to watch test cricket.
Five, location. The SCG is far from the western suburbs. If you barracked for the Eels, odds are they played at Parra. If you went for the Bulldogs, their home ground was in Belmore.
There’s something comforting about a big game being in your burb and not on some hectic train line in a city that you’ve never felt was truly yours.
Six, whiteness begets whiteness. Usually, there's least ONE player the community identifies with (Robbie Farah etc). There are ZERO Lebs who play cricket. Even if you wanted to get your kid into the game you couldn’t point out one person the kid might be able to relate to.
Some folks might not think this is a big deal (it should be about the game blah blah) but trust me when you feel yourself an outsider to start with - it IS a big deal to see someone who looks and sounds like you play a sport you love!
In some ways, I don’t blame cricket for being so white. It has a real hill to climb and other sports have a massive head start. But in other ways, I kinda do blame cricket for not noticing or wilfully ignoring the fact that in the past 200 years almost all its players were white.
Not my opinion BTW. Researchers found that between 1946 and 2015, there were only TEN Test players for the Australian men’s team who weren’t of British descent. TEN. In 70 years!! https://t.co/uXzrIustMC
I mean damn!! I get why there aren’t any Leb players (see above) but why aren’t their more players of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan descent? Here’s your answer I guess. https://t.co/QmbErTh9e6
Anyway, I don’t really know why I’m telling you all this. Maybe because after 3 decades I’ve finally learnt what an “innings” is and, well, I actually like test cricket. I finally get it. Sort of. It’s just so damn white and so damn exclusionary. Get it together mate!

More from Sport

Over 70 former professional rugby players are preparing for legal action against the sport’s governing bodies according to this report.

The group litigation seems to be in its early stages, but World Rugby & Unions will be starting to get twitchy.

THREAD on the key issues 👇🏼


1) Duty of care

Do the governing bodies (World Rugby, RFU, WRU etc) owe players a duty of care in respect of their health and safety? The answer is almost certainly yes (see for example Watson v BBBoC).

2) Breach of duty

Have the governing bodies breached this duty? This is the first of the major hurdles for any litigation.

The question is essentially whether they acted reasonably in the circumstances.

Did they know about the dangers of concussion and fail to act?

Or should they have done more to discover the dangers of concussion but failed to do so?

The NFL case was based on the fact that the NFL knew of the dangers and covered them up. I’d suggest that’s unlikely here. However, it may be that WR/Unions should have done more sooner.

Much will depend upon the state of medical/scientific understanding of concussion at the relevant times.

For example, in the early 80s it may be that there was no indication that concussion might cause long-term complications but, by the early 2000s, there was.
It's Sunday, Fed blackout, am recovering from soccer match, sipping on double espresso, so of course a perfect time to take on Tyler Cowen here. 🙂


Like many people, I enjoy reading Tyler's blog. But there are times (alright, many times) I disagree with him. This is no big deal. I also disagree with myself sometimes (especially my past self). But his recent post left me

What is he trying to say here? After thinking about it for a bit, I think he's critiquing the idea that "running the economy hot" leads to employment *and* real wage gains. Perhaps the former, but only at the expense of the latter. At least, this is what a textbook IS-LM model

tells us if one "runs the economy hot" through increased fiscal stimulus (on consumption and transfers, not public infrastructure investment). If this is what he meant, then he should have just said so, instead of labeling this a "Keynesian" proposition.

In fact, this property follows as a *neoclassical* proposition that is embedded in the IS-LM framework. (For non-economists, note that Keynes did not invent IS-LM; the framework was developed later by Hicks as an interpretation of *some* parts of the General Theory.)

You May Also Like

MASTER THREAD on Short Strangles.

Curated the best tweets from the best traders who are exceptional at managing strangles.

• Positional Strangles
• Intraday Strangles
• Position Sizing
• How to do Adjustments
• Plenty of Examples
• When to avoid
• Exit Criteria

How to sell Strangles in weekly expiry as explained by boss himself. @Mitesh_Engr

• When to sell
• How to do Adjustments
• Exit


Beautiful explanation on positional option selling by @Mitesh_Engr
Sir on how to sell low premium strangles yourself without paying anyone. This is a free mini course in


1st Live example of managing a strangle by Mitesh Sir. @Mitesh_Engr

• Sold Strangles 20% cap used
• Added 20% cap more when in profit
• Booked profitable leg and rolled up
• Kept rolling up profitable leg
• Booked loss in calls
• Sold only


2nd example by @Mitesh_Engr Sir on converting a directional trade into strangles. Option Sellers can use this for consistent profit.

• Identified a reversal and sold puts

• Puts decayed a lot

• When achieved 2% profit through puts then sold
Trump is gonna let the Mueller investigation end all on it's own. It's obvious. All the hysteria of the past 2 weeks about his supposed impending firing of Mueller was a distraction. He was never going to fire Mueller and he's not going to


Mueller's officially end his investigation all on his own and he's gonna say he found no evidence of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election.

Democrats & DNC Media are going to LITERALLY have nothing coherent to say in response to that.

Mueller's team was 100% partisan.

That's why it's brilliant. NOBODY will be able to claim this team of partisan Democrats didn't go the EXTRA 20 MILES looking for ANY evidence they could find of Trump campaign/Russian collusion during the 2016 election

They looked high.

They looked low.

They looked underneath every rock, behind every tree, into every bush.

And they found...NOTHING.

Those saying Mueller will file obstruction charges against Trump: laughable.

What documents did Trump tell the Mueller team it couldn't have? What witnesses were withheld and never interviewed?

THERE WEREN'T ANY.

Mueller got full 100% cooperation as the record will show.