|
The saddest sight of the weekend for sports fans was an ageing Ian Botham describing the row over Andrew Flintoff's drunken escapade in the Caribbean - the night before a match - as a "fuss about nothing". And, in light of the similarity between the two men's behaviour - late nights, heavy drinking, hearty and dangerous pranks - you might think that in Flintoff we have another Botham.
But you would be wrong. Despite the similarity in size, colouring and cricketing ability, there is a radical difference between the two men, a distinction that true cricket fans believe makes all the difference.
Botham was and, you might say, still is a bore. He was also a bully. He was notorious for making life irritating, even painful, for his less ebullient colleagues. But it's said that, in typical bully fashion, he always steered clear of those who stood up to him. Peter Willey,
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Botham could be spectacularly rude. He could sulk. He could be an all-round pain-in-the neck |
|
|
an England colleague and a man of strong arm and strong character, was one cricketer who Botham walked around with care. No surprise to find that Willey today is a respected umpire.
But for others - players, officials, press - Botham had scant respect. He could be spectacularly rude. He could sulk. He could be an all-round pain-in-the neck.
None of the above can be applied to Flintoff. From his attitude to the events of the weekend it is clear that, despite his years, Botham has learned nothing. Yet there is convincing evidence that Flintoff has.
Botham never apologised. But Flintoff has raised his aching head, looked a critical world in the eye, and apologised abjectly and unreservedly. At his press conference yesterday he was a picture of calm but sincere repentance. "I shall learn from this," he said. "I want to redeem myself."
For all his high spirits and beer intake, Flintoff is clearly a substantial man. He's not another Botham. Let us be grateful. 
FIRST POSTED MARCH 20, 2007
|
