A cricket scandal involving ball tampering, and the subsequent actions from those "from within and above"
who are 'those' and what 'subsequent actions' did they do? and where does it say 'from within and above'? So I probably wouldn't say this. has caused
quite a this would be subjective backlash from the public. In a letter to the editor, both Long and Burchill take the same stance in saying that ball tampering is just one in a long list of corruptive actions, although they differ in their approaches.
great sentence! Very economical and to the point! This is in the accompaniment of a cartoon also. This sounds a bit awkward. Could you say 'a cartoon is accompanied to accentuate that...or is in agreement with...etc? While Long chooses to focus on the impacts on people's immediate family, Burchill targets the cricket community, from fans to Cricket Australia.
Lovely intro!
Long begins by contending that the ball tampering incident is just the most recent manifestations of Australia's descent into immorality.
great use of nominalisation + strong topic sentence By
directly attacking Roger Frankel's point of view, Long asserts in which direction his "moral compass" lies, while simultaneously calling out those who oppose his views as having lost their sense of what's right and wrong. By setting up this dichotomy that forces people to either agree or disagree he appeals to readers' sense of morality.
I see what you mean, but maybe you need some more analysis. You know how they say to avoid the classic 'encourages readers to either agree or disagree to the writer' ?! I think you've done this here, so maybe just explain what appealing to readers' sense of morality is important for Long? As evidenced by Taking evidence from news headlines, he
makes parallels with the is this a bit unnecessary? could you just say 'extracts an ever growing..." ? ever growing list that exemplify this, from tax evasion to government corruption, thereby positioning readers to come to the realisation of how commonplace
, immoral actions have become. Furthermore, the use of inclusive language
aims to aid in his argument that this is an issue that affects all Australians, which is followed up by a series of rhetorical question
s that call upon a
parent's protective instincts this doesn't make sense. Just the adjective 'protective' doesn't fit right. I know what you mean, but just in terms of expression, do you want to say 'parental instincts' maybe? something like that? of their children, in which he implies that if this
downward trend doesn't fit here. 'trend towards immorality' or something? continues, it's our "children and grandchildren" who'll have to face the consequences, who might become impervious to such things, or worse yet, view it as something normal or even morally sound. By expanding the situation to encompass other similar incidents, Long positions the readers to
apply not the right word here. the negative attitudes that they have for these other incidents to ball tampering.
did you mean to say something like "carry the same negative stigma associated with the items in the list to the ball tampering scandal aiming to present it in an obnoxious light" or something like that? Following this, Burchill first addresses the root problem, the "rotten culture", in order to exploit how it's "the need to win at all costs," that has caused this debacle,
so readers are made aware of the bigger picture at hand. is this necessary? just seems to be pretty self-explanatory. So it doesn't really add to analysis. By asserting that "Baum is right - "they just don't get it", the compounded effect of having more than one person agree to something results i
n people being more inclined to agree with Burchill. again, firstly this is speculative, and secondly, not a really strong analysis. He then uses words such as "stain" and "haunt" which have a negative connotation
yes good, but rather than just saying 'negative' could you say a bit more? in terms of "connotations of an eerie..." , in order to argue that this incident is a
bigger deal t colloquial language, so search for a formal word. han it's made to be, and will be remembered by the people for a long time, and not in a good way either. By contending that the relationship between ball tampering and corruption i
s analogous to beautiful expression here a symptom of cancer, Burchill
effectively positions to view this incident as part of disease that could potentially lead to the team's end, which would work to elicit fear in both the audience and members of the cricket team, of what the future might hold if this trend were to continue, and so pushes Sutherland to take action to prevent it.
this is quite a long sentence. break it up maybe? Then by making the
generalisation I wouldn't call it a generalisation. Just maybe a "patriotic declaration" ? that all "Australians want action now", r
eaders are positioned to firstly, you're speculative here, so avoid using 'strongly certain' language. Secondly, you're repeating 'are positioned to' quite a bit now looking at earlier paras as well, so maybe think of some synonyms or other ways you could describe feelings --> maybe you should analyse more 'audience feelings' as well in your analysis. want a change also while also condemning Sutherland for his actions, or
lack thereof. ah! You sound like a legal document here, but good expression! In a disparaging tone, Burchill criticises Sutherland's lack of action, by belittling Sutherland's act of "buying himself some time, send some home, take the heat out", a phrase that emanates cowardice as it's a only a temporary fix that doesn't solve to issue at hand.
you can make your topic sentence a bit stronger than this. Is this what stands out to be the most significant to you that you should write this as your first line? think of something more significant or worthier to write about Burchill's progression of argument Burchill builds on this by calling Sutherland's actions a "weak kneed" "dash", which has the negative effect of portraying him as a weakling, a "failure" not worthy of "cricket lovers' and fans'" respect. Then by listing out values such as "honesty, trust responsibility, accountability and yes pride", which Burchill sees as synonymous with morality, he pushes the audience to evaluate for themselves whether these traits are present within Sutherland. However, these are also a list of traits that he also deems Sutherland must show in order to right his wrongs. This shows that he's still leaving room for Sutherland and Cricket Australia to redeem themselves, especially when he claims that the "very least" they could do was to make "Lehman… stand down", following his attack at Sutherland's credibility by claiming it's a "joke" that "he left Lehman in his position". This is a challenge directed at Sutherland, who would therefore want to take steps to correct his misdeeds, after being made a "laughing stock around the world", words which would drive him to remove that label.
You're focussing on Sutherland too much, and this makes your analysis deviate from ball-tampering and what it means to our national identity, etc. Could you use these people, Sutherland, Lehman as examples only (I mean not the people people, but what they said, etc) to further analyse what is at the heart of Burchill's letter. After reading this para, it seems like you're saying that Burchill wrote his letter to only critique Sutherland, and everyone else involved. Clearly, this is not his only intention. Along with the two letter to the editors is a cartoon. This stain removal guide uses humour to give
a refreshing take this is subjective on how corruption within various parts of Australian society will lead to
its whose? doom. By doing so, readers can view the situation from another perspective and gain a better understanding that may be less biased.
No, I don't understand this, and again, avoid this type of analysis which sounds pretty generalised as well... The cricket ball stain refers to the cricket incident, which is "forgotten",
as it's not the main issue. what do you mean? The same can also be said for Tony Abbott's caricature, in which his ears are exaggerated to represent his participation in the electoral riggings. As the white shirt represents purity, morality, the stains on shirts leads readers to believe that there needs to be
a cleansing of immorality awkward expression. Maybe "immorality has intruded on purity, peace, morality, innocence, etc?" so that we can return to state of righteousness, but
the accumulation of stains of questionable origin leads to only one possible solution -
burning it, no, I don't understand this, nor agree to it...which means that if worst comes to worst, it'll be the end of Australia as we know it.
How are you linking your image analysis to any letter? You say "an image is accompanied, so it should serve the purpose to either act in agreement with one of the letters or either refutes the notions behind any of the letters. Link your image to someone's / both letters' arguments.With both Long and Burchill using informal language to seem relatable, readers are urged to consider the impact of corruption on both a small and large scale, and how it would impact Australia as a whole. While Long is more reliant on
scaring the audience into submission, woah! don't be so intense Burchill takes on a tone that mellows out no, I don't think his tone is so pleasant and not of harassment. You've used the wrong word - mellows" w
hen he makes a concession for those involved, ok! So I get that you mean "Steve Smith" here? And how Burchill says that he's an innocent victim and almost sounds a bit sympathetic? But, you haven't really analysed the sense of 'concession' in your paras, so I wouldn't chuck this into your conclusion. Worth discussing about this somewhere in your paras although only after having attacked at them with scathing words.
yeah see, this sounds contradictory to what comparison you just made between Long's and Burchill's arguments.
Hi there!
I really like some of the ways you've expressed yourself - e.g. using those beautiful nominalisations. Haha expression is something that I desperately need to work on too during the year before exams, so that's why I loved some of your sentences
My overall suggestion would be to try and include more analysis rather than summarising? So unpack connotations of some words that sparked really strongly in these letters and then analyse how they would make the audience feel and how they are likely to behave as a result.
Also, avoid really strong and certain language. Instead, things like "aims to.." "seeks to" (sorry for the cliched ones, but like search some synonyms for these) and you'll be fine!
Oh and hey, sorry if I was being really picky!! But please don't think otherwise, afterall, these are just suggestions from a fellow Year 12 student, so it's not like I'm a tutor or teacher or anything
Please only take from this what you think is necessary! And I find setting small goals is so much less stressful than worrying about a whole heap of suggestions!
Also, I'm really not great at giving marks, so maybe someone else can give you a mark next time
Thanks!