Worst higher level cricket relating decisions

[FRAZ]

One more thing , What is reverse swing case ?? Remember the 1992 case against the 2 W's when they won the serious against England. They said these people are cheating . They made the same case against Prabharkar . they took a Quote from Imran's bography that He was doing Ball tempering . Infact Imran was just describing that what is Ball tempering and he practiced in a match which was not even a FC.If he was a cheater then he would never had admitted the same thing . What about M. atherton's cheating . What did the English board said in the first place ? And as far as that case against 2 W's is concerned then it was dropped .. saying , we were so dumb , we didnt get that it was reverse swing . Now the same reverse swing is in each and every coaching manual. So which country is the guilty of giving stupid official statements and then explaining their mistakes later.Was i right or not regarding point 11 ?

 

[Adamc]

Doesnt some one remember
that Steve Waugh and Warne also admited that they have been helping bookies .

And Cronje was less guilty than Salim Malik and shane Warne And Steve Waugh And Azhar Uddin .

Steve Waugh? That would be Mark.
How is Cronje less guilty? Surely match-fixing is somewhat more malicious than giving weather reports (warne and waugh)?

 

[marc71178]

but having said that think of the current state. SA HAVE to play a certain amount of "coloured" plyers now. Sure some are worthy, but just think of the more worthy "white" players. Shouldn't they now be banned for this injustice? I mean you can't rule on the picking of your team because of the colour of their skin.

Hasn't that rule been relaxed now for the main team (unlike in Zimbabwe)

 

[marc71178]

Ban of Cronje was really really too harsh . Why ? because Cronje what ever he did clearly showed he was nt a professional cheater.

What is throwing matches then if not cheating?

Obviously many others and almost all the established good cricketers have had atleast some relation with the bookies. Am I right or wrong ?

Wrong - a few high profile have been involved, but the ICC has cleaned it up.

Have we ever tried to stop Bookies ?? did that bookie got any penalty ?

That's not up to the ICC to punish them though - they have no rule over them, it's a police matter.

Doesnt some one remember that Steve Waugh and Warne also admited that they have been helping bookies . Were they dumped ??

It was Mark Waugh, and all they did was provide weather / pitch info - never threw matches or anything else - so they weren't banned!

And Cronje was less guilty than Salim Malik and shane Warne And Steve Waugh And Azhar Uddin .

Rubbish in the case of Waugh and Warne - I believe the other do did get banned though.

And as far as Chuk is concerned , I ll raise this question that why the certain Chukers not stopped at the start of the carrier

Because they don't chuck?

 

[marc71178]

Remember the 1992 case against the 2 W's when they won the serious against England. They said these people are cheating . They made the same case against Prabharkar .

The casu against Prabhakar was fixing I thought?

they took a Quote from Imran's bography that He was doing Ball tempering . Infact Imran was just describing that what is Ball tempering and he practiced in a match which was not even a FC.If he was a cheater then he would never had admitted the same thing .

But he did admit to using a bottle top to help the ball swing, so he is a cheat?

What about M. atherton's cheating .

It was naive and stupid, and he got about the right punishment for it since it did no lasting alteration, trying to keep it dry (albeit using the wrong thing)

 

[Langeveldt]

Hasn't that rule been relaxed now for the main team (unlike in Zimbabwe)

Yes it has, and the three coloured players in the current team are all there on merit.. Quotas become more apparent down the ladder, (and thats how it should be).. Not sure about Zim..

Neil..

The England team had to drive 2 hours out of Dhaka to do their training.. Wisden said it was like Driving to Suffolk to have a net for an Oval test match... Te ICC should hang their collective heads in shame...

 

[Neil Pickup]

Yes it has, and the three coloured players in the current team are all there on merit.. Quotas become more apparent down the ladder, (and thats how it should be).. Not sure about Zim..

Neil..

The England team had to drive 2 hours out of Dhaka to do their training.. Wisden said it was like Driving to Suffolk to have a net for an Oval test match... Te ICC should hang their collective heads in shame...

Zimbabwe still has quotas at Test level - Mahwire springs to mind.

That doesn't mean there are no nets in Dhaka, though does it?!

 

[FRAZ]

Marc71178,Thats Rubbish , Who says that There has been any change in the action of Shoaib Akhtar ever since he has started his career . And Also there has nt been any significant change in the Murali's action too .

 

[Neil Pickup]

Marc71178,Thats Rubbish , Who says that There has been any change in the action of Shoaib Akhtar ever since he has started his career . And Also there has nt been any significant change in the Murali's action too .

Erm, they don't chuck...

 

[Jono]

I'd just like to mention one of the topics discussed here. South Africa's ban from cricket. You relate it as one of the worst decisions, I just can't in my mind comprehend your level of thought when saying this. Do your support Apartheid? I presume not so I just can't understand how you would come up with this.

 

[luckyeddie]

I'd just like to mention one of the topics discussed here. South Africa's ban from cricket. You relate it as one of the worst decisions, I just can't in my mind comprehend your level of thought when saying this. Do your support Apartheid? I presume not so I just can't understand how you would come up with this.

I'm happy to relate that no-one on this thread agreed with this point (that banning wasn't appropriate) one iota.

 

[PY]

Welcome to CW Jono

I am of the people who disagrees with that point about South Africa purely because as (I think it was LE) someone pointed out, it brought publicity if nothing else to the plight of people in South Africa.

The one about indoor cricket is nonsense too. IMO, the only reason for anyone to want to play cricket indoors (not including training) has faults.

If it happened, cricket could be played in the winter in climates which are inhospitable (sp?) during that season. BUT people are already complaining that there is too much cricket being played at the moment so why have more all year round. It would just increase workload and stress on players bodies which are already suffering. Doubly so because more dangerous twisting of the body especially ankles and knees.

It would increase the amount of time that players spent on lifeless surfaces, which would do them no favours when they come outside which is were the big games are. It wouldn't be much good for fast bowlers neither; no seaming, swing minimal and hard surfaces for running on.

And finally, why would anyone want to play indoors when they could go outside and play in sunshine and fresh air. It's one of the big pluses about cricket!!!

I agree 100% with you about the ODI games having more quantity than quality. Too many games evaporate from memory straight away because they were, quite simply, crap.

 

[Bazza]

I can remember watching cricket with my Grandad as a youngster and he hated bouncers. He said they shouldn't be allowed. Whilst I can see the good thing about them and don't feel they should be removed, does anyone else think they might have at least in part contributed to poorer bowling we are seeing at the moment - it's an easy cop out when the batsmen are on top to bowl short stuff.

 

[luckyeddie]

I can remember watching cricket with my Grandad as a youngster and he hated bouncers. He said they shouldn't be allowed. Whilst I can see the good thing about them and don't feel they should be removed, does anyone else think they might have at least in part contributed to poorer bowling we are seeing at the moment - it's an easy cop out when the batsmen are on top to bowl short stuff.

It used to be the case that bouncers were a far more potent threat to batsmen - but this is probably more to do with the fact that batsmen really were in mortal danger. Nowadays, the bouncer can deliver a bit of a bump, a bruise to the ego, possibly even a broken bone or two, but the good old hard hat stops it from really being the weapon of fear it once was.

The Charlie Griffith bouncer was the most fearsome of weapons because it wasn't a half-pitcher - and it put people in hospital.

I honestly think that these things go in cycles - there are some truly brilliant pace bowlers around (Pollock and McGrath spring to mind) - one who has the potential to become an all-time great (Shoaib) and a few of real promise. A great pace attack requires two, though - at present, no country can field two brilliant speed merchants together (although when McGrath and Gillespie are together they can run through teams) although Pakistan are getting there.

At the moment, it's the 'age of batsmen' - maybe I ought to re-phrase that as the 'age of groundsmen'. In a couple of years, we might ket back to the 'norm' of 350 in the first innings being considered a very good score.

 

[Anil]

That would be me. I guess I will reply after all.

We're talking about 30 years of a man's life!! One deed does not make him a worse man than all the rest. That is what I meant when I said he is no different from the rest. Many people make mistakes. His happened to be a slightly larger mistake and he was justly punished for it. I chose not to punish him any more by withdrawing my respect.

And yes there is good and bad. The bad people are in prison! And good people are not completely devoid of bad things.

There is no black and white. There is only gray.

I am not talking about black or white and I am not saying that those who haven't taken bribes are saints or something, but when you reduce what he did to "just one deed", that just becomes a huge understatement. Do you believe in degrees of good and bad? That basically makes up different shades of what you call gray. Cheating on your teammates for money while representing your country would be on the real darker side of that gray, wouldn't it , compared to say, racially abusing your opponent in the heat of the moment on the field. I am not condoning either, but who would you say, sinned more? Or, would you put them at par? If that's the way you look at things in general, I can understand why you said that, otherwise I don't.

 

[Langeveldt]

Zimbabwe still has quotas at Test level - Mahwire springs to mind.

That doesn't mean there are no nets in Dhaka, though does it?!

Just because a coloured person gets in the team because of his skin colour, doesnt mean there are quotas.. I dont think Zim has anything official.. But its pretty obvious there are some dodgy goings on...

There are no first class practise facilities in Dhaka.. Reading the report made it seem like England had no choice but to drive two hours out of town.. And Bangladesh also..

 

[marc71178]

Just because a coloured person gets in the team because of his skin colour, doesnt mean there are quotas

So what exactly DOES it mean then?

 

[Neil Pickup]

There are no first class practise facilities in Dhaka.. Reading the report made it seem like England had no choice but to drive two hours out of town.. And Bangladesh also..

Still doesn't mean no nets, though, does it? :P

RE Zimbabwe - when was the last time they fielded a team with less than 3 black players?

 

[FRAZ]

So what exactly DOES it mean then?

infedality hehe

 

[GIMH]

infedality hehe

what?

Historic thread nonetheless, Jono's first post and all