The cricketing nation with the most praising/criticising media?

[Richard]

Well I'm 22 and plenty of people still think I'm a teenager looking at me. If Flynn's anything like me, he'll be pleased.

 

[Retox]

. If Flynn's anything like me.

For NZ crickets sake I hope not

 

[Richard]

Why?

 

[Precambrian]

Regarding going over the top while winning and going all hammers down while losing, the prize whould go to Indian media. And a fair share to the "layman" public. You won't believe reactins here. One day they'll throw stones, black -oil and stuff at your oil and people for losing in the WC, the other day they'll vandalise your house and celebrate around as if each of them just one $1 Million lottery. There have been cases where inflammatory reporting have led to rioting leading to deaths, however some sort of self censorship has been there for some time for now.

As for "news-distortion" and "character-assassination", first prizes go to the Australian media, the way they target individual players off the field was unbelievable. There is a certain notion that nothing wrong can happen with Australian players and all wrong are created by other players, which is just as evident from their writings. Press has a big role in shaping public opinion, and is considered to be a mirror to the society, the way the events of the previous month were reported were shocking and saddening.

 

[Chemosit]

As for "news-distortion" and "character-assassination", first prizes go to the Australian media, the way they target individual players off the field was unbelievable. There is a certain notion that nothing wrong can happen with Australian players and all wrong are created by other players, which is just as evident from their writings. Press has a big role in shaping public opinion, and is considered to be a mirror to the society, the way the events of the previous month were reported were shocking and saddening.

Not true across the board at all. there are plenty of Aussie writers who have levelled criticism at Australian players over the last few months and many of the public who agree with them. A lot depends on the quality of the writer and the rag (s)he is writing for. If anything, some members of the Aussie press are harder on their players than other nationalities.

 

[Flem274*]

Why?

Feel like nailing my coffin and answering what I think he's thinking.

TBH you're CWs Matthew Sinclair. Very good poster but you just don't budge on some things and argue forever and a day, just like Sinclair doesn't listen to people trying to help him with his batting.

If Daniel Flynn avts like Sinclair and doesn't listen to coaches etc then thats another talent down the drain for us.

Nothing personal intended and I'll leave it at that, you've heard it all before I'm sure.

 

[Richard]

Hmm, methinks you've missed several occasions where I've changed my mind based on what CW posters have said, but you're right I don't change my mind as often as *ahem* some people.

No point forming an opinion at all if you're going to change whilly-neely.

 

[GotSpin]

As for "news-distortion" and "character-assassination", first prizes go to the Australian media, the way they target individual players off the field was unbelievable. There is a certain notion that nothing wrong can happen with Australian players and all wrong are created by other players, which is just as evident from their writings. Press has a big role in shaping public opinion, and is considered to be a mirror to the society, the way the events of the previous month were reported were shocking and saddening.

What? Have you ever read Peter Roebuck.

 

[Ikki]

Regarding going over the top while winning and going all hammers down while losing, the prize whould go to Indian media. And a fair share to the "layman" public. You won't believe reactins here. One day they'll throw stones, black -oil and stuff at your oil and people for losing in the WC, the other day they'll vandalise your house and celebrate around as if each of them just one $1 Million lottery. There have been cases where inflammatory reporting have led to rioting leading to deaths, however some sort of self censorship has been there for some time for now.

As for "news-distortion" and "character-assassination", first prizes go to the Australian media, the way they target individual players off the field was unbelievable. There is a certain notion that nothing wrong can happen with Australian players and all wrong are created by other players, which is just as evident from their writings. Press has a big role in shaping public opinion, and is considered to be a mirror to the society, the way the events of the previous month were reported were shocking and saddening.

To be honest I think the Indian media take the prize for the 2nd part too.

 

[sirdj]

To be honest I think the Indian media take the prize for the 2nd part too.

I think you have to wait till Australia tours India later this year for you to announce this 'prize'.

 

[Beleg]

Pakistani media is even more harshly critical than indian media

 

[Flem274*]

Hmm, methinks you've missed several occasions where I've changed my mind based on what CW posters have said, but you're right I don't change my mind as often as *ahem* some people.

No point forming an opinion at all if you're going to change whilly-neely.

Fair call that and I acknowledge it, just saying what I suspect the meaning behind his comment was.

 

[Retox]

Feel like nailing my coffin and answering what I think he's thinking.

TBH you're CWs Matthew Sinclair. Very good poster but you just don't budge on some things and argue forever and a day, just like Sinclair doesn't listen to people trying to help him with his batting.

If Daniel Flynn avts like Sinclair and doesn't listen to coaches etc then thats another talent down the drain for us.

Nothing personal intended and I'll leave it at that, you've heard it all before I'm sure.

Get out of my mind.

 

[Burgey]

How many next Ian Bothams have we had due to the press ? It does depend on the newspaper also. The tabloids are more likely to make such outrageous comparisons. The Times is the best for cricket, imo.

Obviously I don't see as much of the UK press as other posters, but I've always thought the Guardian had some good writers, while their over-by-over stuff was very funny during the last Aussie summer.

 

[Days of Grace]

So, what are the English tabloids reporting today?

 

[Richard]

I don't tend to read the tabloids a great deal, but here's a couple of my posts directed at the Sky team from the *Official* tour thread:

Everyone on Sky going-on about fear of failure.

Now why TF d'you think that might be now? Couldn't possibly be because, oh, of all the bloody bagging you gave them for throwing their wickets away in Sri Lanka could it???????????????

Sheeysh. If those in the media care about England's success, they sure do a damn decent impression of not doing so, very, very often.

This is another thing I'd like to know TBH - I wonder where people get their information that they can comment with such certainty from.

Sure, Hoggard and Harmison looked underbowled. But has Bob (and the several others who said exactly the same thing) got concrete evidence that they hadn't been doing the work they should be?

If they haven't, if they do treat the game like a chore, I agree completely that it's extremely poor - they don't deserve 1\10 of £250,000 if so. But there seems to be too much assumption here, to me.

Frankly, there needs to be some answers from some people. Instead of bashing-on on TV about how these bowlers are underbowled, wouldn't Bob and co be much better going and talking to them? Finding-out how much bowling they've actually been doing, and making suggestions about what might be changed? And wouldn't they be more likely to get truthful answers if the players then knew Bob and co weren't going to go shouting about it on TV 5 minutes later?

As I said earlier this morning - much of the time a "selling" cricket media works completely contrary to a successful team.

 

[Precambrian]

To be honest I think the Indian media take the prize for the 2nd part too.

Proof, atleast any instances to quote? Not because I love Indian media, darn, anything but it, but because I am curious. Heard of nonsense, hysterical, over the top, ignorant, etc associated with Indian media, but this is new.