Casualities of the "Super-Series"

[C_C]

I think the superseries could've waited.
I dont think re-scheduling the Ashes was a feasable proposition.
Instead, IND could've played SL or BD (or both) in the last few months since the IND-PAK series...
poor planning from BCCI IMO.

 

[Duncan]

I think the superseries could've waited.
I dont think re-scheduling the Ashes was a feasable proposition.
Instead, IND could've played SL or BD (or both) in the last few months since the IND-PAK series...
poor planning from BCCI IMO.

That was the point of this thread... the Super Series could have waited... not move the Ashes. Proper planning was needed.

 

[marc71178]

No, they announced it well in advance.

It's better to have it early in the 05-06 season than slap bang in the middle.

Is there any coincidence that all 5 of the so called "victims" involve one board?

 

[chekmeout]

I think the superseries could've waited.
I dont think re-scheduling the Ashes was a feasable proposition.
Instead, IND could've played SL or BD (or both) in the last few months since the IND-PAK series...
poor planning from BCCI IMO.

Do you have any idea how hot it has been in India in the last few months.. not to mention the monsoons...

 

[Duncan]

No, they announced it well in advance.

It's better to have it early in the 05-06 season than slap bang in the middle.

Is there any coincidence that all 5 of the so called "victims" involve one board?

WHY SHOULD REAL CRICKET BE POSTPONED FOR THIS POINTLESS SERIES? Answer that please.

 

[marc71178]

No cricket would be postponed if certain boards used their brains and looked forward.

These dates have been known for over a year, and every other board has been able to arrange all their commitments around it.

One board went the opposite way and cancelled a Test and ODI series from earlier this year, one which you are now calling a "casualty" of the SS. In reality, it should have already been played.