OPINION: Cricket controversy

This week it was reported that Western Suburbs first-grade captain Jeff Cook made the unprecedented step of declaring at 0/17 and sacrificing first innings points to accommodate his star teammate, who could only play this coming Saturday.

At the toss, Cook asked rival Parramatta captain, Michael Castle, to allow his side to bowl first so Clarke would have the chance to bat. But Castle was always planning on sending Wests in if he won the toss, and quite rightly stuck to his guns.

“I was always going to send them in on that wicket, I won the toss and did that. Jeff said he’d declare after one run or one ball," he was quoted as saying.

“He said he’d been put under pressure from Cricket NSW to bowl first so that Michael Clarke could bat on the second day."

Cook, pressured or not, defended his decision to media.

"I look at this as an exceptional circumstance; it's the Australian captain and he needs a bat," he said.

"If Michael bats next week, gets enough runs and plays for Australia in the opening Test, I'll feel as though I've done the right thing."

Had Castle declared as soon as Parramatta reached the 17-run first innings total it would have been even more farcical.

Instead Castle, whose side is struggling in last place, batted through, opening the door for Clarke to take the crease.

Yet in another twist, Clarke is now likely to ditch the grade fixture entirely to pad up for a tour match starting Friday.

Where does that leave the Sydney grade competition? Sure international cricketers drop back all the time when negotiating injuries, but matches can't be 'fixed' for the benefit of a single player, even if that is the Australian captain.

All those players involved in the Wests/Parramatta match have been disrespected and told by the faceless 'decision-makers' of Australian cricket that when push comes to shove, they are simply sparring partners for those brandishing the green and gold.

And that is exactly how the Parramatta players are taking it.

"All these blokes are giving up their weekends, we were pretty peeved, we actually considered getting to 0-18 and declaring,” Cook said.

“Michael Clarke is a big drawcard, I would love to play against him, I’d love for the Australian captain to play the first Test, but not to the detriment of an entire competition."

In all likelihood, Michael Clarke knew nothing about the scheming and would be embarrassed by the controversy. His only agenda would have been proving he was right for a tough five days in Brisbane starting December 4.

So sure, we should allow Australian players to find form, and/or prove their fitness in grade cricket, but showing such contempt for the feeder competition will have more ramifications than losing Clarke for the opening test.