BCCI threaten to cancel SA tour later this year, CRAZY

[hendrix]

No because Srinivasan will simply retalliate by saying "we will thrash them 4-0 at home"

Secondly, CSA simply does not have the guts to stand up to BCCI and do something like that. When it comes to cases of bullying, the ones who are bullied have to take some responsibility for their submissiveness and weakness and reluctance to stand up to the bullies. And this is why I don't just blame the BCCI for the state of affairs because if the rest of the world bends over backward lets you walk all over themselves, why won't you go ahead and do just that?

Except that sporting governance isn't a schoolyard.

The only way that CSA could have any power over the BCCI here is to simply let the rest of the world - and in particular Indians - observe the behaviour of the BCCI. That contrast in behaviour between the boards is the starkest when CSA hold their heads high. As soon as they resort to mud-slinging, it's not BCCI being bullies but two boards having a dispute.

As it stands, it's not a dispute, it's bullying. I would rather it's seen that way than a bitchfest.

 

[Jono]

Indeed, good post. Going back at BCCI may be funny, but it'd be the wrong move.

 

[Maximas]

Didn't want to create a separate thread, so thought to post this here:

Have an opinion? Think again. One of the requirements for a BCCI commentator is the willingness to avoid a list of taboo subjects, including Indian selection, DRS or administrative matters

This is really disturbing stuff.

Yep, I've said it before, I'll say it again - the BCCI are the next fox news

 

[Black_Warrior]

Except that sporting governance isn't a schoolyard.

The only way that CSA could have any power over the BCCI here is to simply let the rest of the world - and in particular Indians - observe the behaviour of the BCCI. That contrast in behaviour between the boards is the starkest when CSA hold their heads high. As soon as they resort to mud-slinging, it's not BCCI being bullies but two boards having a dispute.

As it stands, it's not a dispute, it's bullying. I would rather it's seen that way than a bitchfest.

I was not suggesting that they engage in mud slinging or any of those mentioned by others.

By standing up I meant saying we will hire who we think is the best fit for the post, based on our own criteria, and we will not accept any other cricket board trying to influence our decision. If they attempt to bully us by threatening to cancel the tour, then so be it."

Now the thing is, when you stand up for something based on principle, its almost a given that there will be some sort of financial repurcussion, but that's the price you pay. A good move by CSA would have been to immediately invite another team, say a West Indies (who haven't toured South Africa in a while, a Sri Lanka or even a Bangladesh to give a strong message that the home series will go ahead with or without India.
Now of course doing this would result in a considerable financial loss as a lot of the sponsors and backers would pull out, but as I said, that's the price you pay for standing up.
Now if you are unwiling to face the repurcussions, then yeah by all means go ahead and lick their boots, but don't ask me to respect you because you haven't got any respect for yourself to begin with.

 

[Furball]

^^^ Got to agree Cabinet. Think 3 or 4 test series are decent. The last few Ashes have just got that drag along feeling of late.

Not a big fan of two but it certainly is better than nothing.

But maybe there could be 3....CSA has proposed it.

BCCI okays India's tour of South Africa: sources

Nah, 5 Test series really test a player's technique and temperament in ways that 3 Test series don't. The Ashes is the ultimate because of the history behind it and also because it's the only remaining 5 Test series.

Think of Clarke's struggles against Stuart Broad for example. In a 3 Test series he goes away having scored a ton at Old Trafford and feela like he's won. In a 5 Test rubber, he's still got 2 Tests worth where everything about his game will be worked over.

That's why 5 Test series are great. It's a crying shame we don't get more of them.

 

[hendrix]

The thing about the BCCI is that if they want to be all super capitalist and take-no-prisoners then that's fine, but they then have to a) not be a "charitable organization" and b) be susceptible to free market business rules.

In other words, they shouldn't be allowed to ban players for playing for other leagues (like the ICL) because that's anti-competitive, monopolistic behaviour. Competing Indian sports bodies should not be labeled as "rebels" simply for offering and alternate product to the market.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

The thing about the BCCI is that if they want to be all super capitalist and take-no-prisoners then that's fine, but they then have to a) not be a "charitable organization" and b) be susceptible to free market business rules.

In other words, they shouldn't be allowed to ban players for playing for other leagues (like the ICL) because that's anti-competitive, monopolistic behaviour. Competing Indian sports bodies should not be labeled as "rebels" simply for offering and alternate product to the market.

Stop trying to make sense of the BCCI.

 

[Top_Cat]

Nah, 5 Test series really test a player's technique and temperament in ways that 3 Test series don't. The Ashes is the ultimate because of the history behind it and also because it's the only remaining 5 Test series.

Think of Clarke's struggles against Stuart Broad for example. In a 3 Test series he goes away having scored a ton at Old Trafford and feela like he's won. In a 5 Test rubber, he's still got 2 Tests worth where everything about his game will be worked over.

That's why 5 Test series are great. It's a crying shame we don't get more of them.

Indeed. Pete Siddle started the last Ashes well but fell away toward the end too.

 

[Flem274*]

Except that sporting governance isn't a schoolyard.

The only way that CSA could have any power over the BCCI here is to simply let the rest of the world - and in particular Indians - observe the behaviour of the BCCI. That contrast in behaviour between the boards is the starkest when CSA hold their heads high. As soon as they resort to mud-slinging, it's not BCCI being bullies but two boards having a dispute.

As it stands, it's not a dispute, it's bullying. I would rather it's seen that way than a bitchfest.

Indeed, good post. Going back at BCCI may be funny, but it'd be the wrong move.

Normally I'd be inclined to agree because we see in real life that acting with class when mud is being thrown wins more often than not, but in this case trolling would be very effective in the short term at least. South Africa are the number one side in the world with the best pace attack and they're about to host a side representing a cricket board who cry foul if the ball bounces above knee height or moves laterally even a milimetre (see 2002, NZ and 2011, England for #IndianTears). India aren't a chance in hell of winning and everyone knows it, but if South Africa question their testicular fortitude as loudly and as often as possible India would simply have to tour or confirm they are cowards. This is the perfect opportunity for the bullied to become the bully by reframing the issue from "The BCCI don't like someone" to "The BCCI have piss trickling down their legs".

 

[hendrix]

No, that would just unite Indian defensiveness. South Africans would be painted as Australians with Ponting-esque hypocrisy. It would be wrong, but that's what would happen.

As much as the Indian public is aware of the grievances with their board, I'd guess that they're still very proud of their players and will defend their abilities when criticised.

 

[Flem274*]

India could be as defensive as they liked, it wouldn't matter if the world media were writing stories about South Africa calling them gutless.

 

[centurymaker]

I can't believe CSA haven't started trolling the **** out of the BCCI in the media and calling them pussies who are scared of Steyn and co. ruining their batsmens' averages. I can't be the only **** **** who would do this.

Just goad them and mock them until they simply have to show up.

There will be no Dravid, no Laxman, no Tendulkar, no Sehwag and probably no Gambhir. So it'd be odd and foolish to bring up that the 'random' new Indian batsmen are afraid of touring...
Whose batting avg is going to be ruined? No ones.

 

[hendrix]

India could be as defensive as they liked, it wouldn't matter if the world media were writing stories about South Africa calling them gutless.

well, the world media doesn't matter. Indian media and Indian public perception is the only force with any capability to change these things. Even that's drastically unlikely.

 

[Black_Warrior]

No, that would just unite Indian defensiveness. South Africans would be painted as Australians with Ponting-esque hypocrisy. It would be wrong, but that's what would happen.

As much as the Indian public is aware of the grievances with their board, I'd guess that they're still very proud of their players and will defend their abilities when criticised.

Not just the players but the board too.

 

[Black_Warrior]

India could be as defensive as they liked, it wouldn't matter if the world media were writing stories about South Africa calling them gutless.

I am not sure what to make of 'world media' when it comes to cricket.. The only nations where cricket is talked about are the nations that play cricket and even then, it is treated like a stepchild.
So who exactly will write these stories? Australian media? They are not aware of any cricket that does not involve Australia, sometimes even those involving Australia overseas.
English media? I doubt they would be get involved in a bitch fight between BCCI and CSA

The rest are too weak and non influential to matter.

So it comes down to Indian media. You really think Indian media is going to support CSA agains their own cricket board?

 

[Maximas]

Won't be an issue soon - the BCCI will have control over all cricket media soon

 

[Cevno]

So it comes down to Indian media. You really think Indian media is going to support CSA agains their own cricket board?

Actually the Indian Media doesn't like the BCCI at all and are supporting CSA more or less in this case from the start and calling it bullying too.

But if CSA make it about mud slinging on the players and a bitchfest then they will support Indian players obviously as Nationalism comes into play.



Anyway, not many if any agree with this behavior by the BCCI in India. Disgusting behaviour really.

Reportedly down to Ego Battle of Srinivasan again.

Worst Board president. And we've had some bad ones.

 

[JontyPanesar]

The thing about the BCCI is that if they want to be all super capitalist and take-no-prisoners then that's fine, but they then have to a) not be a "charitable organization" and b) be susceptible to free market business rules.

In other words, they shouldn't be allowed to ban players for playing for other leagues (like the ICL) because that's anti-competitive, monopolistic behaviour. Competing Indian sports bodies should not be labeled as "rebels" simply for offering and alternate product to the market.

LOL you haven't debated those ideological 'free market' libertarian putzes, have you?

Here's how it works:
1. Gain a lot of economic power.
2. Justify that power based on an ad hoc philosophy called 'libertarianism' so that you sound consistent and intellectual and stuff.
3. Justify market inefficiencies like monopolies and pollution under the guise of freedom and 'respect mah authoritah' and stuff.

 

[hendrix]

ICC news : BCCI likely to demand inquiry against Becker | Cricket News | Cricinfo ICC Site | ESPN Cricinfo

In his statement released to the media last week, Becker had said it was "improper" to allow a member body to "blatantly disregard an ICC resolution".
...
The BCCI's plan to call for an Ethics Committee inquiry is said to be based on their "evidence" that, at the time of making a public statement, Becker was an acting advisor to Cricket South Africa. BCCI insiders allege that Becker's statement came at the behest of an "aide" within CSA. The BCCI is expected to use this argument to appeal to other Full Members to avoid recurrence of a Becker-like situation that could be, in the words of a BCCI insider, "damaging" for the governance of cricket by any official involved in the game.

ummmm, as opposed to BBCI members who do nothing for their own board? How on earth is that ethically wrong?


India in South Africa 2013-14 : Decision on India's SA tour likely 'before weekend' | Cricket News | South Africa v India | ESPN Cricinfo

During a "fruitful" discussion between both the parties in Mumbai on October 12, the BCCI had offered to play two Tests and three ODIs in the month of December on the condition that CSA chief executive Haroon Lorgat is not involved in India affairs in future.

ESPNcricinfo understands that CSA has offered to "send Lorgat on long leave" in order to ensure that the tour go ahead.

This is the most petty ****ing thing. Someone needs to give these man-children a ****ing spanking. I just don't get how they don't feel completely embarrassed by their own behaviour.

I mean, how could anyone seriously make that request and keep a straight face?

 

[Flem274*]

This is why they need to start trolling these muppets. It's all they're good for.