No Hollioake game for Indian stars

[luckyeddie]

I bring to your attention Andre's lead article

Andre's article

regarding the BCCI's refusal to allow Mohammad Kaif and Yuvraj Singh to participate in the Ben Hollioake Memorial game.

The waffling reason given by the Indian board pays lip-service to a supposed policy regarding players participating in non-official friendlies, but the real reason - well, I leave you to decide.

I think it stinks, is quite disgusting and is an insult to the memory of a fine young man

 

[V Reddy]

I think you are referring to the Indo-Pak thing but i don't think it is the main reason. They didn't allow many benefit matches and charity matches to be played in the last 2 years or more b'coz if they had allowed every year there would have been 10-15 matches even after their busy schedule. Now if they had allowed them to play after they had disallowed these type of matches in India then they would have had to face severe bashing from some past cricketers. Also they allowed last year Srinath to play for Asia XI in an indoor match in Eng. There are even going to be matches played between India and Pak U-19 now and so i don't think they disallowed them to play b'coz they have to play along with Pak players. But if the Indo-Pak is the real reason though then it is really sad that they allow for an indoor match but don't for a charity match.

 

[Deja moo]

The waffling reason given by the Indian board pays lip-service to a supposed policy regarding players participating in non-official friendlies, but the real reason - well, I leave you to decide.

?????????????
Why rake up this argument now?

What business is it of the English board( or whoever it is whos organizing this match) or its followers to question the policy of the Indian board regarding the matter of Indian players playing against or alongside Pakistani players?

Its not as if they had it written into their contracts that they HAD to play these informal matches....

Ben Hollioake may have been a 'fine young man' , but the Indian boards decision is in support of the many fine young men patrolling India's borders and facing the fire.

 

[Andre]

I found this decision by the BCCI rather appauling.

Politics has no place in cricket, and it certainly not in this occasion - a match in remembrance of Ben Hollioake. Surely they could have let it ride.

Whatsmore, they declared if Kaif and Yuvraj wanted to play charity games, they would have to go baqck to India as there are some organised there!

 

[luckyeddie]

?????????????
Why rake up this argument now?

What business is it of the English board( or whoever it is whos organizing this match) or its followers to question the policy of the Indian board regarding the matter of Indian players playing against or alongside Pakistani players?

Its not as if they had it written into their contracts that they HAD to play these informal matches....

Ben Hollioake may have been a 'fine young man' , but the Indian boards decision is in support of the many fine young men patrolling India's borders and facing the fire.

The Indian board brought the argument up themselves by refusing permission and then coming up with the trumped-up reason. The simple fact that it is now in the public arena and being debated openly means that it is inevitable that people are going to question the politics of the situation.

The players concerned wanted to play in the game, they were invited, accepted and then the BCCI said 'No' - if it is for political reasons as the world suspects (and Orangepitch, that reason WOULD be respected by some, but there is no consistency because as has been said the U19's are planning to play) - why not say that?

The players are not contracted to play, that is true. Are they contracted NOT to play? There appears to be doubt about that.

I will pass over your last paragraph without comment

 

[masterblaster]

I agree with Andre and Eddie, terrible decision by the BCCI, absolutely terrible. I havent been online in a while and just saw Andre's article today.

Total lack of respect, dignity and most importantly heart is shown by the BCCI.

A terrible decision, im absolutely disgusted. Charity is Charity, and after all didn't Sachin Tendulkar play in the Princess Diana Memorial Game??

If so to Princess Diana, why not to such a gifted and promising young member of the International Cricketing Family???

Yuvraj and Kaif should be playing, and this is none of Jagmohan Dalmiya's bloody business.

 

[marc71178]

I'm just upset that AA hasn't been asked to play.

 

[Choora]

?????????????
Why rake up this argument now?

What business is it of the English board( or whoever it is whos organizing this match) or its followers to question the policy of the Indian board regarding the matter of Indian players playing against or alongside Pakistani players?

.

What business was it of Indian board to threaten NZ of a boycott if NZ cricket team didn't fulfill their commitment of playing a series in Pakistan last summer??

It was indeed an unfortunate decision by BCCI.

 

[V Reddy]

What business was it of Indian board to threaten NZ of a boycott if NZ cricket team didn't fulfill their commitment of playing a series in Pakistan last summer??

Yeah that was a stupid thing done by BCCI when we ourselves are not playing :!( . Also i read an article today in a local newspaper criticizing BCCI that they allowed some players to play for a match with Bollywood stars but not for a match for Hollioake. I saw a match in which Srinath played with Pak players a year back in 10 over innings test match in Eng . This is what makes me angry with BCCI , stupid inconsistent policies.

 

[V Reddy]

Now i remember it was " Power Cricket" in which Srinath played along with Pak Cricketers. It was around Oct 2002 . The relations between India-Pak were much worse then than they are now.

 

[Deja moo]

regarding the BCCI's proposed boycott of NZ, that decision was made by the ACC, not the BCCI alone.
Inter-board politics had a role to play , as the NZ board had tried to initiate a proposal to expel India from the ICC due to the contracts fiasco.
As for the government allowing under 19 teams to play with pakistan, it could be because no one in india follows under 19 cricket in the manner senior level cricket is worshipped.
Regarding charity matches, the board is clear that if te players do not wish to play charity matches in india ( organized to benefit retired test cricketers) they had better show cause for wanting to expend their energy playing such matches elsewhere.

 

[V Reddy]

Now Srinath and Yuvraj are going to play with Pak Players for Rest of World in the Power Cricket and so i think that puts to rest the India-Pak thing:P

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/xml/uncomp/articleshow?msid=133506

 

[Mr. P]

rest of the world eh? is this an actual match to be played, or is there a catch?

 

[luckyeddie]

D'Oh. I'm in Amsterdam a month too late.

Mr Ponting, click on the link. It's got all the details. Yes, there is a match. Yes, there is a catch (one handed if the ball hits the roof)

 

[V Reddy]

rest of the world eh? is this an actual match to be played, or is there a catch?

There are 2 matches going to be played between ROW and Asia. It will be like a test match with 15 overs for each innings. They are being played on Oct4 and Oct 5.

 

[Mr. P]

D'Oh. I'm in Amsterdam a month too late.

Mr Ponting, click on the link. It's got all the details. Yes, there is a match. Yes, there is a catch (one handed if the ball hits the roof)

what about one-hand, one-bounce?

 

[marc71178]

There are 2 matches going to be played between ROW and Asia. It will be like a test match with 15 overs for each innings.

Not even Bangladesh's innings last 15 overs a time!

 

[Mr. P]

Not even Bangladesh's innings last 15 overs a time!

i think they've done that twice in ODI's. not sure though. they did it once when they were bowled for 36 or something in the world cup, didn't they?

 

[Neil Pickup]

That was Canada. Bangladesh lasted longer.

 

[Mr. P]

That was Canada. Bangladesh lasted longer.

canada, bangladesh, whats the difference?


just remembered the difference. john davison.