Wisden - 5 Cricketers of the Year 2011

[Lillian Thomson]

Oops, make that four.

 

[smash84]

I guess Wisden could have avoided drama by naming somebody else or maybe they were trying to make a statement with it?????????

 

[Somerset]

I guess Wisden could have avoided drama by naming somebody else or maybe they were trying to make a statement with it?????????

Pretty damning statement given how rarely they've failed to publish five cricketers for a particular year: "Wisden has only previously broken with convention to recognise outstanding individuals WG Grace, Plum Warner and Jack Hobbs, and also during the first and second world wars when competitive cricket was suspended." Personally I'd have reselected the fifth but I suppose good on them for making a point.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

Good on them.

Not sure Chris Read deserves to be one of the four though.

 

[four_or_six]

Good on them.

Not sure Chris Read deserves to be one of the four though.

I think he does, given he led Notts to the championship.

 

[four_or_six]

I guess Wisden could have avoided drama by naming somebody else or maybe they were trying to make a statement with it?????????

In the interview this morning, they said basically that because there were still appeals ongoing, that it was appropriate to leave it open in case they needed to reinstate the player (who is Amir, presumably).

 

[GIMH]

Just to clarify as this has caused confusion in the past, this award is predominantly based around cricket which happens in England.

 

[Xuhaib]

why Aamer why

 

[blahblahblah]

^ hope those few thousand dollars are worth it

 

[keeper]

If he is guilty it's quite poignant to leave the award not given.

If he is proven innocent quite nice he can pick it up as a sign of his rehabilitation.

If he gets off on a series of ugly legal technicalities it leaves Wisden in quite an awkward place I think.

 

[marc71178]

How exactly is he going to be proven innocent at this stage though?

 

[keeper]

I suppose if the Crown Court and the sport arbitration court unequivocally came out and stated he is innocent we'd have to accept it. I imagine it would take some hitherto undisclosed evidence for this to happen though.

 

[zaremba]

No. He has been found guilty already by the independent ICC panel. He faces different charges at the Crown Court. He will be acquitted of those charges if the jury thinks he is probably guilty but is not satisfied so that they are sure (ie "beyond reasonable doubt" as they sometimes say). So an acquittal, on different charges to those for which he's already been found guilty, would hardly be him being "proven innocent".

I was surprised by Scyld Berry's comment that he's not going to name the individual because he doesn't want to "kick a man when he's down". Oh really? In that case why make a point of only picking 4 cricketers of the year, and making it clear that one of the banned Pakistan players would have been the fifth? Does he really think anyone is in any doubt about which individual he's talking about? If that doesn't equate in Scyld Berry's mind to kicking a man when he's down, I shudder to think what would.

 

[keeper]

Will be interesting to see if the ICC recognise the verdict of Court of Arbitration if it doesn't go their way - although admittedly unlikely from what I've read.

 

[fredfertang]

I think Mr Berry's comments are a little bit "artificial"

 

[smash84]

I was surprised by Scyld Berry's comment that he's not going to name the individual because he doesn't want to "kick a man when he's down". Oh really? In that case why make a point of only picking 4 cricketers of the year, and making it clear that one of the banned Pakistan players would have been the fifth? Does he really think anyone is in any doubt about which individual he's talking about? If that doesn't equate in Scyld Berry's mind to kicking a man when he's down, I shudder to think what would.

haha.....yeah

I think Mr Berry's comments are a little bit "artificial"

awta

 

[FBU]

I think they should have picked 5. By only picking four it's as if Berry is saying Aamer IS the 5th but we can't put his name down so we will leave a blank there, in memory of him. Was there really no other player who had done enough to be the fifth?

I don't know why Aamer got Man of the Series either. I think my other favourite bowler should have got that. (If not him, then Trott).