ICC agrees to change Oval forfeiture to a draw

[vic_orthdox]

What would interest me is if the decision were made even if Pakistan weren't in such a strong position.

 

[Somerset]

Farcical decision IMO, Pakistan refused to play and therefore forfeited the match. Its stood in the record books as a forfeit for nearly two years, so why change it now? ICC obviously backtracking, ridiculous.

 

[social]

Great, one less rule I have to teach my son when he takes up the game

Use to be: refuse to play = loss

Now its: who cares, play when it suits you

 

[Somerset]

What would interest me is if the decision were made even if Pakistan weren't in such a strong position.

Oh absolutely, I mean if it was New Zealand or South Africa for instance they'd stand no chance of getting the result changed.

 

[Fusion]

So the ICC caves in to pressure wrongly and their excuse is based on a decision where they also caved in wrongly and we'll probably never hear what actually happened.

Does this mean Asian teams can just pull out of matches against Enland whenever they are losing from now on?

The ICC is a joke, this decision doesn't really matter at all, but i find it totaly incomprehensible that anybody- even someone incompetent enough to work for the ICC- could possibly think this is the right decision.

All this decision did was give fire to people who think like the above. They’re sure to say “Pakistan was cheating in that match and they bullied ICC into ruling in their favor back then, just like it did right now”. I have no idea why the PCB fought for this. The result of the match is meaningless. Like SS stated, the team took a principal stand and should live with the consequences that come from taking that action.

 

[Jono]

Oh absolutely, I mean if it was New Zealand or South Africa for instance they'd stand no chance of getting the result changed.

He means strong position in the match.

 

[Langeveldt]

Farcical decision IMO, Pakistan refused to play and therefore forfeited the match. Its stood in the record books as a forfeit for nearly two years, so why change it now? ICC obviously backtracking, ridiculous.

Whilst on that subject, they are changing a lot of records in South African cricket to do with our isolation.. Things that happened 20-30 years ago. (games that weren't counted as FC are being changed, or something along those lines)

 

[Jono]

Just let them all play amongst themselves IMO.. We don't need them, and they don't need us..

You really are an idiot to say such a thing. Its not an 'us' vs 'them'. And you've been making posts like this for a long time now.

The BCCI doesn't represent me, and the PCB doesn't represent Pakistani fans.

 

[pasag]

Was always very likely to happen once the ECB had no objection to it.

 

[Somerset]

All this decision did was give fire to people who think like the above. They’re sure to say “Pakistan was cheating in that match and they bullied ICC into ruling in their favor back then, just like it did right now”. I have no idea why the PCB fought for this. The result of the match is meaningless. Like SS stated, the team took a principal stand and should live with the consequences that come from taking that action.

Whilst it might be meaningless in the context of the series, I would assume that the only reason for fighting the result would be for the moral principle that their actions weren't deserving of a forfeiture (which is obviously ridiculous) - so I guess from their perspective it does has some meaning.

 

[Somerset]

He means strong position in the match.

Ah, interpreted Pakistan's 'position' incorrectly.

 

[Jono]

But Pakistan aren't in a strong position when it comes to negotiations. Australia's refusal to tour Pakistan proving that.

They rely on the BCCI for any influence.

 

[Richard]

Farcical decision IMO, Pakistan refused to play and therefore forfeited the match. Its stood in the record books as a forfeit for nearly two years, so why change it now? ICC obviously backtracking, ridiculous.

Whilst on that subject, they are changing a lot of records in South African cricket to do with our isolation.. Things that happened 20-30 years ago. (games that weren't counted as FC are being changed, or something along those lines)

I actually don't mind backtracking and retrospective changes. The problem here is the possibility of precedent.

Though I have to say, I very much doubt it's all that much of a danger. As said - if the game hadn't been a dead one, never mind if the "losing" team hadn't been in an obviously dominant position, I doubt anyone would even think of the possibility of having the result changed.

It's a poor decision, but hopefully it won't have any ramifications.

 

[Richard]

The whole point of the ICC is to ensure that all nations get a fair say in the way the game is run.

Like it or not, it isn't, and never has been. Yes, that is the idea of it, but in reality it's never, ever been such a thing. It's only ever been the sum of its parts, and some parts have always had more clout than others.

As said, though - many people are totally overreacting on this. It's not a case of Pakistan ruling the roost - the ECB were also in favour of a change of result, and this was the case from the outset. Had the ECB not been so, the result wouldn't have been changed.

Everyone who is in favour of a change of result should have thought more carefully about the ramifications, but it is NOT a case of Asian power this, not in the slightest.

 

[GIMH]

Takes away our record of the biggest 1st innings deficit to be turned into a victory

Farcical...does this affect our rankings now that it was 2-0 in that series? Why not decide that we would have got the 10th Aussie wicket at Old Trafford but for rain, and change that series to 3-1 while we're at it? Let's right all the wrongs; umpiring errors, bad light, you name it. Who cares if it's two years after the match ended, through the choice of the players involved???

What a steaming pile of ****.

 

[Fusion]

But Pakistan aren't in a strong position when it comes to negotiations. Australia's refusal to tour Pakistan proving that.

They rely on the BCCI for any influence.

Spot on. Pakistan cricket is probably at its weakest point in history. We don’t have a strong team or any exceptional players, so our standing in the game is weak. Add to that the fact that our board is completely incompetent and it leaves Pakistan with nothing to stand on. PCB’s only source of strength is the BCCI. Heck, even the “prospect” of the Champions Trophy taking place in Pakistan is due only because of the backing of India.

 

[Barney Rubble]

Like it or not, it isn't, and never has been. Yes, that is the idea of it, but in reality it's never, ever been such a thing. It's only ever been the sum of its parts, and some parts have always had more clout than others.

As said, though - many people are totally overreacting on this. It's not a case of Pakistan ruling the roost - the ECB were also in favour of a change of result, and this was the case from the outset. Had the ECB not been so, the result wouldn't have been changed.

Everyone who is in favour of a change of result should have thought more carefully about the ramifications, but it is NOT a case of Asian power this, not in the slightest.

The ECB were also in favour of a change in result? That strikes me as fairly ludicrous, TBH. Any background available on why?

 

[Dasa]

The sky is falling in! The Asians are taking over the world! Some ****ing ridiculous comments here. In case people didn't realise, the ECB supported this decision as well, where are the comments denouncing their influence on the game? Any excuse to have a go at the 'Asian bloc' will do, I suppose.

 

[zaremba]

An idiotic, illogical, half-witted decision.

 

[zaremba]

the ECB supported this decision as well, where are the comments denouncing their influence on the game?

The ECB are as cretinous as the rest of the idiots running the world game.

Happy now?