Sanz
Hall of Fame Member
Both.What is the "ridiculous statement" you are referring to? Made by Dravid or Shukla?
Both.What is the "ridiculous statement" you are referring to? Made by Dravid or Shukla?
Reporter: Are you going to do anything about the umpiring in the 7th odi?That should not be a reason to make ridiculous statements. Dravid clearly implied the importance of that decision and that is as candid as one can be over a particuolar dismissal.
And that is different from what was said there.Reporter: Are you going to do anything about the umpiring in the 7th odi?
Dravid: Well, the captain's report will contain my observations about that aspect.
How so?And that is different from what was said there.
“It obviously was a huge decision. He is an in-form batsman and one good partnership would have taken us to 250.”How so?
oh, come off it. Every team in the world will always only talk about the decisions based on the impact it has had on the game. A bad decision given to McGrath will not affect Ponting as much as a bad decision given against Hayden. That is how it works and that is how it will work.So they are complaining bcuz it was their star batsman playing in prob his last Int in Eng in a deciding match of the series. IOW, how dare you give him out ?
Had it been a number 11 batsman with many years ahead of him and not in a decider, nobody would've heard a peep from them.
Umpiring should remain the same; regardless of the batsman, his legacy or the state of the match.
u want to disagree with what point there? That it was a huge decision or that one good partnership could have helped India reach 250?“It obviously was a huge decision. He is an in-form batsman and one good partnership would have taken us to 250.”
Clearly an assumption that if not for that dismissal India would have made 250.
But he doesn't say that is the only thing in the report. It is a part of the report.“It obviously was a huge decision. He is an in-form batsman and one good partnership would have taken us to 250.”
Clearly an assumption that if not for that dismissal India would have made 250.
Na, you're talking ideology. I'm talking practicality. If every team followed your oh-so-lofty standards, no team would be eligible to point out umpiring errors, and Rome would continue to burn.Hey I didn't bring this robbing house analogy.It is you who brought this analogy or robbing house and insurance claims etc in this discussion of cricket, not dont fret when I present you . If you are benefitting from a neeighbourhood robbery in any way then it is your responsibility to report it immidiately and not wait until you are robbed and offer to return it only after it has been found out that you have been knowingly benefitting from the neighbourhood robbery. If you dont return the money on your own and complain when you are the victim, then it is hypocrisy even if you accept during the investigation that you were benefitting from it .
Same way If you are going to benefitting from poor umpiring and know that you have knicked the ball and umpire has missed it, it is your responsibility to tell the umpire that you knicked the ball. If you dont report it either immidiately to the umpire or afterwards in the series report then it is akin to the situation above when you decide to complain against the decisions that go against you. It will indeed be hypocrisy.
I agree, You may not be able to reverse those decision that went in your favor, but you certainly can be honest in your report and comment about the umpiring standards in general and point out the occasions when the decisions were wrong even if it was in your favor. But if you choose to ignore the entire issue of poor umpiring altogether(because you benefitted from it) and report it only when you are on the wrong side of it then yes it is opportunistic and hypocritical.
Its called leaving nothing to chance. Teams can be fined for over-appealing under ICC rules. Were India indicted for over-appealing?What do you mean India didn't go out of their way to deliberately force decision ? Appealing after every ball in tight situation is indeed going out of the way, are you saying that India have not accepted and would not accept those decision for those stupid over appeals knowing fully well that 98% of those are not-outs ? They clearly go out of their way to get umpires to give outs when there are not and they happily accept it.
So batsmen being given out wrongly isn't being victimised?And how is India a victim here, Did they lose the ODI series because of Umpiring ?
No, it is speculation you're involved in. I'm amazed you seem to think news conferences are the only outlets for information. All it takes is a few journalists catching the manager on his way somewhere and posing a few questions.There was no news conference, no one asked the question. so it must have been an information passed voluntarily by Rajiv Shukla, who has a history of doing that, hence It is a logical conclusion.
The captain represents the team. If player x feels done by wrong umpiring, it is not he who fields a complaint in an individual capacity. The team, represented by the captain does so.Rest of the team doesn't write the team report, Captain does. And captain doesn't feel confident in technology. The major issue through out the series has been the umpiring of Taufel and not others, so it is him whose competence is in question here.
Difference of percepton. I see no whining. The very job of the umpires involves makng decisions in the public eye. If pointing out their mistakes is character assasination, man do I get character-assasinated everytime my mentor berates me for my mistakes in my group projects. I don't see their character being questioned at all. Only their decision making.It depends on the language one uses and when/how one uses. There is a fine line between filling a complaint and whinning. Rajiv Shukla's statements sounded like Whinning, Dravid's didn't. And it should be kept private because it has something to do with professionalism. Dar/Taufel are pretty competent individuals, infact more competent than anyone in their profession right now, and to bring out this sort of mistakes in public give the media a chance to do a character assasination, puts them under extreme pressure and what not.
Yeah, Taufel and Dar made it to the Elite panel without any scrutiny, did they? I suppose they were born with silver spoons and were unquestioningly placed among the elite without them being evaluated at every stage of their careers. I suppose the ICC has the provision of teams evaluating the umpires in the end-of-tour reports just for fun. Sheesh, you're beginning to sound like some government servants I encounter often here in India.The last line of this quote is just pure rubbish and clearly shows your general disrespectful attitude towards umpires. You wont find more dignified umpires than Taufel and Dar. If that is how you keep umpires on their toes then good luck with it, very soon you will be left with Ashoka DeSilva's of the world. You promote good umpiring by educating them with the help of technology, not by putting them under constant scrutiny.
Hot air or not, it is certainly providing a fascinating insight into the thought processes of certain members here.We still have no confirmation of any official complaint by BCCI. Wonder if all this debate will turn out to be hot air.
Same speculation you are involved in the other thread where you posted "Vengsarkar must be happy", so please get off the high horse and dont pretend as if you make posts only after you have all the proof in the world.No, it is speculation you're involved in. I'm amazed you seem to think news conferences are the only outlets for information. All it takes is a few journalists catching the manager on his way somewhere and posing a few questions.
Ofcourse, but it is the captain that has the final authority and discreation to decide what he wants to do and how he wants to do. He cant come and say, oh I wrote this report because Sachin or Sourav were not happy with the decision and even though I personally was not for filling the report etc etc. If a captain files the report, it is he who is held responsible for what is written in the report, regardless of what the team thought or asked.The captain represents the team. If player x feels done by wrong umpiring, it is not he who fields a complaint in an individual capacity. The team, represented by the captain does so.
May be you dont, but I do and that's my right. I am not saying that Team management is doing a character assassination of the umpires by filing such a report but they certainly are giving media and public another reason to do so by coming out and making such statements in public.Difference of percepton. I see no whining. The very job of the umpires involves makng decisions in the public eye. If pointing out their mistakes is character assasination, man do I get character-assasinated everytime my mentor berates me for my mistakes in my group projects. I don't see their character being questioned at all. Only their decision making.
There is nothing wrong with evaluation, but doing so in public is. Go file the report, who is stopping you, but for gods sake dont make your opinion public. Would you like If Dravid started commenting about Players performance in Public ? And that you mentioned smething about mentors, would you like it if your mentors started criticing your report in public(voluntarily or not) in front of the whole world ?Yeah, Taufel and Dar made it to the Elite panel without any scrutiny, did they? I suppose they were born with silver spoons and were unquestioningly placed among the elite without them being evaluated at every stage of their careers. I suppose the ICC has the provision of teams evaluating the umpires in the end-of-tour reports just for fun. Sheesh, you're beginning to sound like some government servants I encounter often here in India.
Taufel and Dar didn't make it to the Elite Panel because of scrutiny and whinning in public, they were consistent in their umpiring and hence they made it to the elite panel. You seem to imply that I am against filling a report. For the last time, I will make it clear :-Yeah, Taufel and Dar made it to the Elite panel without any scrutiny, did they? I suppose they were born with silver spoons and were unquestioningly placed among the elite without them being evaluated at every stage of their careers. I suppose the ICC has the provision of teams evaluating the umpires in the end-of-tour reports just for fun. Sheesh, you're beginning to sound like some government servants I encounter often here in India.