Should this happen?

[Son Of Coco]

Thats fine with me.........but then you can't talk about the line drawn in sand business....and forget about racial insults as well because then you have to swallow the whole hog.


Never said that people do not succumb to temptation........obviously they do.........but it wont be for a petty $ 240..........even prostitutes get paid more than that here.


Maybe.........but one does not become an outcast in the West.........In India you're an outcast. And this is a place where your cast matters.


This is the very first match that he has captained........he wanted to revive the tipping tradition and was in a position to do so and so he did.


Why the hypocrisy? When it is OK to prepare a pitch to suit the home team, Why is not OK to be tipped if the home team liked your work? Its not as if he was expected to prepare a neutral pitch?


It happened in India right up till Kapil............then it died down under Azhar, Tendulkar, Ganguly and Dravid........now Dhoni wants to revive it, so its really up to him.

I'm not going to bother going sentence by sentence. It's not hypocritical to expect someone to do their job without being 'tipped'. Especially when it could be construed that that tip is payment for services rendered. It's not up to the captain to tip groundstaff, if the (extremely poor) BCCI want to give him a bonus at the end of the year then they can go for it. If Ricky Ponting paid the groundskeeper at any Australian ground for a job well done after a test I'm pretty sure there'd be an uproar.

Temptation's relative. If you're getting paid a big enough wage to do your job you don't need tips, if you're not then $240 is quite a bit. As far as not becoming an outcast in the west goes, I think if you succumbed to bribery in most cases you'd be highly frowned upon.

This is basically why there'll never be an agreement between what's right and wrong when it comes to what goes on in cricket between most nations anyway. What's a big deal to some isn't to others and vice versa.

 

[Precambrian]

BCCI gives 'fitting reply' to ICC on Kanpur pitch
http://cricket.indiatimes.com/BCCI_...o_ICC_on_Kanpur_pitch/articleshow/2957500.cms


The BCCI has pointed out that of the 32 wickets that fell in course of the match 14 wickets were claimed by pace bowlers and 18 by spinners which belies the notion that the pitch was tailor-made for spinners.

"The fact that the South Africans were 152 for one on the opening day at one stage shows that there was nothing devilish in the pitch," a top BCCI official told TOI , adding that only one delivery had risen awkwardly during the entire match, causing Rahul Dravid’s downfall in the first innings.

"On the same wicket, South Africa scored 265 runs and India replied with 325. The curator can hardly be blamed if batsmen fail to perform," the official added.

Asked about the cracks in the wicket and the dusty surface, the official pointed out: "Look, it is for the first time that Test matches were played in India in April when the conditions are very hot and dry. Curators have two choices - either to water the pitch heavily as was the case in Ahmedabad or stick to normal watering. Kanpur heat perhaps caused the cracks to open up, but it was in no way under-prepared."

The BCCI has expressed its regret that instead of lauding the fact that the last two Test matches had produced results, the ICC had chosen to question the nature of Kanpur track.



Good reply.

 

[Engle]

Since tipping is so acceptable, is it OK for the Captain to tip anyone he so pleases ?

 

[Burgey]

Tipping the groundskeeper in common in Indian cricket. However, to avoid looking like shady business, I believe this practice should stop. It's not a lot of money, but it opens you up to needless attacks and looks stupid.

AWTA. I think you've hit the nail fairly and squarely on the head.

I for one do not suggest and have not suggested the wicket was unfair or was doctored (whatever that means), rather it may give an impression something is going on,when it plainly isn't.

 

[Sanz]

BTW, we didn't play India in 2002 and the Chennai test in 2004 was the second Test match and they were trailing 1-0. So where's my apology? .

I am sorry about those silly mistakes, it just means that I am getting older. I guess in 2002 it was WI or England. You are right about the 2004 series, Chennai test was the second of the series.

 

[Sanz]

Not only was I not talking about any Chennai match, except the 2004 one, but the 1990's information is irrelevant in any case (we're talking since 2000 here).

The information since the 1990s is relevant because since the 90s Chennai has always been spinning track. Since 2000 India have been behind in a series 4 times, twice against SA and twince against Australia.

I dont remember India preparing a turner in 2000 Vs. SA and in 2001 Vs. Australia. in 2004 Vs. Australia, the 2nd test was in Chennai which has been a spinner's track since the 90s, hence no reason for me to believe that the pitch would have been different If India were not behind in the series.

Kanpur 2008, to some extent, is the only exception so far and here also, it was not like ball was turning square from day one. It was nothing compared to what we have seen in the early/mid 90s.

 

[Sanz]

2) Admitting it when you're at fault would be nice. Just once would do (is that why you refused to respond to that part where I countered your claims about that Gabba game?). Prove it's possible.

3) I have tried my very hardest to be polite to you during this debate. In return, you flick me (and my arguments) off. That's poor form, really.

I refused to respond because you refused to validate the links I posted.


Only thing I probably missed in all that the part "2) This isn't a mid-game repair. This is changing a pitch at the last minute. I know this because I remember that game being called off without a ball being bowled."

Yes this wasn't a mid-game repair but a doctored pitch according to the opposition coach. That said the match in question wasn't abandoned. NZ had lost the game.

I dont know what your definition of a doctored pitch is, But if you think a pitch that turns square from day one is a doctored pitch then Isn't WACA a doctored pitch as well where the ball bounces from Day one ?

 

[Sanz]

Point taken, although I have heard stories flying around that the curator did that specifically to spite Sourav Ganguly. Had he not done so, the Wisden Almanack seems to indicate that the wicket would have been more conducive to turn.

Well the first part is more like a speculation than a fact and Almanac is simply wrong about the second part of the statement. Because Nagpur has been known for high scoring draws. It would have been a FLAT wicket rather than a Turner. Not that there is anything wrong with preparing turners.

That being said, they prepared a wicket with uneven bounce for the Chennai Test match...which is part of the reason (aside from Australian over-reliance on the front-foot during the first innings) why Anil Kumble made hay. So my point above still stands.

I dont think that is correct. From what I remember, it wasn't a raging turner neither did it have the uneven bounce you are suggesting.

 

[DaRick]

I am sorry about those silly mistakes, it just means that I am getting older. I guess in 2002 it was WI or England. You are right about the 2004 series, Chennai test was the second of the series.

Yeeeeeeeeeeeessssss!

 

[DaRick]

The information since the 1990s is relevant because since the 90s Chennai has always been spinning track. Since 2000 India have been behind in a series 4 times, twice against SA and twince against Australia.

I can't comment on the 90's Chennai (I was in the toddler/early childhood years). In any case, correct though you may be, I had no intention of talking about the 1990's, nor Chennai pitches specifically since 2000. I mentioned Chennai 2004 as an example of a pitch which provided uneven bounce. It doesn't mean that I said that all Chennai wickets were like that, or were raging turners (proof would be this year's pitch).

I dont remember India preparing a turner in 2000 Vs. SA and in 2001 Vs. Australia. in 2004 Vs. Australia, the 2nd test was in Chennai which has been a spinner's track since the 90s, hence no reason for me to believe that the pitch would have been different If India were not behind in the series.

Here's what you wrote:

"3. 2000 Series Vs. SA, India were trailing SA in the 2 test series, Did India make a dust bowl, perhaps, but was it a raging turner no, It probably resembled the Kanpur(2008) pitch most with uneven bounce and spin on the 3rd day."

When I've heard the term 'dustbowl' used, it's generally directed at a 'spinning track'. Please enlighten me as to what your personal definition is. If you remember correctly, you also gave me permission to include Kanpur as an example of a 'raging turner', so I did. Otherwise, I don't think I would have (it's certainly not Mumbai, for one thing).

Kanpur 2008, to some extent, is the only exception so far and here also, it was not like ball was turning square from day one. It was nothing compared to what we have seen in the early/mid 90s.

You said that the pitch above resembled the Kanpur one, though, so is that another exception, then?

 

[DaRick]

I refused to respond because you refused to validate the links I posted.

I didn't think validating the link was important, admittedly. If you want me to, I'll give you my opinion on it if you post it again, though.

Only thing I probably missed in all that the part "2) This isn't a mid-game repair. This is changing a pitch at the last minute. I know this because I remember that game being called off without a ball being bowled."

Yes this wasn't a mid-game repair but a doctored pitch according to the opposition coach.

John Bracewell is as dubious a coach (and possibly a dodgier character) as Mike Procter is a match referee. Just as you don't take Procter seriously, please do not expect me to take Bracewell seriously.

The fact that this isn't a mid-game repair disqualifies it from being compared to the situation in Melbourne 2003, IMO.

That said the match in question wasn't abandoned. NZ had lost the game.

Nope. I checked the scorecard. Unless you're thinking of another Brisbane game?

I dont know what your definition of a doctored pitch is, But if you think a pitch that turns square from day one is a doctored pitch then Isn't WACA a doctored pitch as well where the ball bounces from Day one ?

Not comparable. You expect the WACA pitch (one that isn't a road, anyway) to have decent bounce from day one and flatten out as the match progresses. Conversely, you don't expect a pitch to be turning square whilst part-timers are bowling on it during what is essentially the second-day. You would normally expect that from a turner during the fifth-day.

It also depends on the amount of turn and from what length you get the turn, FWIW.

My definition (and silentstriker's) is somewhere in this dastardly thread. BTW, what is yours?

 

[DaRick]

Well the first part is more like a speculation than a fact and Almanac is simply wrong about the second part of the statement. Because Nagpur has been known for high scoring draws. It would have been a FLAT wicket rather than a Turner. Not that there is anything wrong with preparing turners.

Not in isolation, no, but it would've been interesting that occured during the Nagpur Test.
I'll take your word for it about the rest, though.

I dont think that is correct. From what I remember, it wasn't a raging turner neither did it have the uneven bounce you are suggesting.

It wasn't a raging turner and as I admitted, the Australian batsmen played him a touch too much on the front-foot, particularly during the first innings. I also acknowledge that Kumble bowled very well. That being said, some of his deliveries (and Harbhajan's) reared up at the batsmen, as well. That's why I felt that the bounce was uneven.

 

[Sanz]

When I've heard the term 'dustbowl' used, it's generally directed at a 'spinning track'. Please enlighten me as to what your personal definition is. If you remember correctly, you also gave me permission to include Kanpur as an example of a 'raging turner', so I did. Otherwise, I don't think I would have (it's certainly not Mumbai, for one thing).

You said that the pitch above resembled the Kanpur one, though, so is that another exception, then?

Yes, but we both agree that it is no where close to Mumbai(which was not done deliberately to benefit India because they were trailing).

DustBowl (From Wiki) :-

"....As a match progresses, the pitch dries out. The Laws of Cricket prevent the pitch from being watered during a match. As it dries out, initially batting becomes easier as any moisture disappears. Over the course of a four or five day match, however, the pitch begins to crack, then crumble and become dusty. This kind of pitch is colloquially known as a 'dust bowl' or 'minefield'. This again favors bowlers, particularly spin bowlers who can obtain large amounts of traction on the surface and make the ball spin a long way..."

 

[Sanz]

Not comparable. You expect the WACA pitch (one that isn't a road, anyway) to have decent bounce from day one and flatten out as the match progresses. Conversely, you don't expect a pitch to be turning square whilst part-timers are bowling on it during what is essentially the second-day. You would normally expect that from a turner during the fifth-day.

Apart from Mumbai 2004, I have not seen any pitch in India that turns square from Day one or two. Even in Kanpur, Chawla and SAffie spinners were ineefective.

It also depends on the amount of turn and from what length you get the turn, FWIW.

That's the key basically. Even Indian part times know the right areas to bowl, with some attacking close in fielding and excellent catching by them. That's why they were more succesful than Piyush chawla, who didn't know how to exploit the pitch.

Trust me if Harris were playing for India in the Kanpur test, he would have got lot more wickets.