Cricket Betting Site Betway
Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 62

Thread: The ICC is sending wrong signals by awarding the match to the hosts!

  1. #1
    Cricket Spectator
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    15

    The ICC is sending wrong signals by awarding the match to the hosts!

    The match ended in shame. The crowd, which watched the West Indies put the Indian attack to the sword on Tuesday morning and then erupted as the Indian openers ran riot, watched the third one-day match being abandoned after 27.1 overs following three incidents of crowd misbehaviour.

    ICC match referee Mike Proctor awarded the match to India under the Duckworth-Lewis system which came into force since 25 overs had been completed.

    But the decison left a bad taste in the mouth. Only stand-in captain Ridley Jacobs and manager Ricky Skeritt attended the presentation ceremony from the Windies side. Former West Indian paceman Ian Bishop, here as a commentator, summed up the mood when he said, "I can't believe this is happening. It will set a bad precedent and send the wrong message to miscreants that they can finish a match if India is winning by throwing (things on to the field)."


  2. #2
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tamil Nadu
    Posts
    964

    India deserved to be the winners, they were the better team and would had won the match had the crowd not disrupted it.Crowd trouble occus everywhere so don't make a fuss about it, it was bad indeed and hopefully it won't happen in future!
    ------------------------------------

  3. #3
    U19 Cricketer
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    497


    To be fair, it should have been declared as no result!

  4. #4
    Hall of Fame Member age_master's Avatar
    Plasmanaut on Fire Champion!
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sydney, NSW, Australia
    Posts
    15,777
    India would have won the match easy if it was not abandoned
    Member of CW Green
    Kerry O'Keefe - Worlds funniest Commentator


  5. #5
    All Time Legend Paid The Umpire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    In Your House, With A Knife!
    Posts
    2,300
    I think that the game should either been given to the Windies or called a no result.

    If spectators are allowed to stop games, then well it should penalise the home team. IF the game went to the away, side would you chuck stuff onto the ground?


    NO!

  6. #6
    International Debutant V Reddy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Hyderabad,India
    Posts
    2,550
    I think it should have been declared as no result although India was winning.

  7. #7
    Eyes not spreadsheets marc71178's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    England
    Posts
    62,908
    I'm surprised but pleased by the fair nature of the comments suggesting a no result was right - I was going to post something along these lines yesterday, but expected that I'd get shouted down, and didn't want to cause conflict.

    Good on you all!
    marc71178 - President and founding member of AAAS - we don't only appreciate when he does well, but also when he's not quite so good!

    Anyone want to join the Society?

    Beware the evils of Kit-Kats - they're immoral apparently.

  8. #8
    U19 Captain R_Powell_fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Oman
    Posts
    618
    IMO It doesn't matter whether the Indian team were winning the game or not, It should have been a no-result, and saying that crowd trouble happens everywhere doesn't cut it, I mean, If everybody jumped into a river of molten lava would you too ??
    On a lighter Note: You never know...maybe Dillon will get 4 wkts in 4 overs and R.Powell will get a hat trick and India will collapse.....
    The BCCI MUST take action to prevent any such re-ocurrances of this nature...it is simply not cricket, i.e: crowd trouble.
    "And, when you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it" - Paulo Coelho, The Alchemist

  9. #9
    International Debutant
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Canberra, ACT
    Posts
    2,585
    crowd disruptions of this matter do not occur everywhere to my knowledge....

    a single incident can be looked upon as an abnormality - but 3 matches in a row is beyond pathetic!!!!!

    a non result should be awarded in the first instance of disruption by the crowd, but IMO it does not go far enough for repeat offences. Even tho' this is the first of the 3 matches to have actually been abandoned because of the disruptions I do not think that a 'no result' is fair because of the incidents at the proceeding 2 matches & the reports that this game was disrupted 3 times b4 being called off.

    IMO the continuing disruptions are in part attributable to the lack of positive and definative action being taken re the earlier incidents.

    EG - elsewhere miscreants can be banned for life; the team / association heavily fined; and forced to play subsequent matches either away from home, with no gate (crowd), or even barred from the competition for a number of years....

    A riot by Liverpool supporters in a European Cup final resulted in the deaths of about 21 of the opposition supporters. The consequences were that ALL English clubs were banned from ANY European football competition for a decade. At the time of this ban Liverpool was THE dominant club not only in English football but also in Europe. This not only hurt all the clubs pride & revenue big time, but was a contributing factor to the demise of the performance of the national team.

    While I am not saying that we have sunk to this level of behaviour, I think the options should be there for teams to suffer similar fates because of persistant crowd disruptions. The precedent is there that nations have been banned from international competition in the past for other reasons, & I do not see that there should have to be a 'direct' threat to the players for a team or players to refuse to tour because of such behaviour!!!!

    !

  10. #10
    International 12th Man Bazza's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Hants, England
    Posts
    1,710
    So what happens is if England bowl first in all home ODIs in future (assuming we win the toss), all we need to do is get off to a good start in reply, then the crowd can cause problems and we win the match by the D/L method. See a problem with this? I do, and that is why the match should have been a no result at the very least. I would have liked to see the match awarded to the Windies, but the ICC would never do that.
    My house is burned down but I can see the sky.

  11. #11
    School Boy/Girl Captain
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    115
    I think that by gving away india the game because of crowd touble isnt going to help the crowd problem but it will further encourage the home crowd to interrupt.

    It doesnt matter who was winning because cricket is a games of chance and West Indies could have had that chance any time.

    I think that game should have been declared 'no result'.

  12. #12
    State Regular
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Tamil Nadu
    Posts
    964
    Originally posted by anzac
    crowd disruptions of this matter do not occur everywhere to my knowledge....

    !
    It has happened in England, Australia, Pakistan,Bangladesh and SL!

  13. #13
    International Coach Anil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Tattooine
    Posts
    13,453
    Ideally, it should have been a "no result". It is not fair to penalise the home team or the opposing team for the rowdy acts of a bunch of hooligans.

  14. #14
    Request Your Custom Title Now! Top_Cat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Marburg, Germany
    Posts
    27,072
    A 'no-result' is probably the fairer to both teams but I believe that the home team has to take responsibility for their home crowd to some extent, hence the match (especially since it was the third time in a row this has happened) should have been award to the WI, regardless of whether India looked like winning or not.

    Giving it to India was beyond a mistake. It certainly sends an ugly message to those who wish to bet on or disrupt games and want their team to win.

  15. #15
    U19 Cricketer
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    497
    Originally posted by Top_Cat
    A 'no-result' is probably the fairer to both teams but I believe that the home team has to take responsibility for their home crowd to some extent, hence the match (especially since it was the third time in a row this has happened) should have been award to the WI, regardless of whether India looked like winning or not.

    Giving it to India was beyond a mistake. It certainly sends an ugly message to those who wish to bet on or disrupt games and want their team to win.
    Its the host Cricket board that has to take responsibility of their home crowd and not the home team.Although if the services of Indian cricketers had been acquired to calm down the crowd and had they refused to cooperate then it would have been a different case

Page 1 of 5 123 ... LastLast


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •