The ICC show some backbone

[Craig]

Full story here!

I must say this is very good news.

 

[luckyeddie]

My God.

I never saw THAT one coming.

(no, seriously, I didn't. Curse my reputation for being the funny man)

 

[chicane]

Full story here!

I must say this is very good news.

Should've been done before the SL series.

 

[Slow Love™]

Should've been done before the SL series.

Couldn't agree more.

Sounds from what I read that South Africa and India applied some real pressure to the ICC - interesting. What bothers me though, is that surely everyone must be aware of the possibility that the ZCU might do what it takes to return the rebel cricketers (with the obvious exception of Ervine, you'd assume) to the side, and then do whatever it feels like upon the completion of the series? Still, I guess that'll save England.

Hopefully they'll just send the Aussie team home tomorrow, rather than give us some pointless one-dayers to play.

 

[Craig]

I'm sure Hampshire wouldnt mind this series not going ahead for obvious reasons.

 

[Scallywag]

How will they validate Sri Lankas win if they turn around and say that the same team is not up to standard for playing Australia.
What possible reason could they give for allowing Zim to play SL and then say they are not good enough to play Aus.

Not only that but if WI recieve a couple of more floggings they might take away their test status.

 

[Jayzamann]

Yes, my thoughts exactly. Nobody seemed to care when Sri Lanka and Muralitharan got to tear these guys to pieces. Why not Australia?

 

[Slow Love™]

Here's something weird - I was just watching the ABC news here in Melbourne, and James Sutherland of Cricket Australia was saying that regardless of the outcome of these talks, the test series was going ahead anyway.

I guess he knows something we don't.

 

[luckyeddie]

Yes, my thoughts exactly. Nobody seemed to care when Sri Lanka and Muralitharan got to tear these guys to pieces. Why not Australia?

Many members of Cricket Web have been quite vociferous in their condemnation of the ICC for refusing to take a stand over the sackings, even before the Sri Lanka series started. That series was a farce, the Australia one will be no less so.

I'm wondering whether the whining and bleating from some quarters is because certain people see the possibility that Shane Warne might miss out on the possibility of a few wickets if the tour is cancelled or converted to one-dayers only.

You're forgiven for not knowing the furore on here, being new.

 

[Scallywag]

I'm wondering whether the whining and bleating from some quarters is because certain people see the possibility that Shane Warne might miss out on the possibility of a few wickets if the tour is cancelled or converted to one-dayers only.

.

Have you a link to this whining and bleating or even who it is.

This thread only contains one poster who mentions Warne and I can detect a bit of jealousy in the post. It must really cut you up everytime Warnie takes a wicket.

 

[Craig]

Have you a link to this whining and bleating or even who it is.

Have a look through previous threads on this?

 

[luckyeddie]

Have you a link to this whining and bleating or even who it is.

This thread only contains one poster who mentions Warne and I can detect a bit of jealousy in the post. It must really cut you up everytime Warnie takes a wicket.

I'm sorry if I've touched a raw nerve (again).

I mentioned Warne because it seemed the natural thing to do, seeing as I couldn't see any benefit to anyone in the series taking place at all other than the quest for world records, and as Warne is the most likely candidate, it seemed logical to mention him.

It doesn't bother me how many wickets Warne takes - he's an exceptional bowler who has taken legspin and texting to hitherto unknown levels.

 

[marc71178]

How will they validate Sri Lankas win if they turn around and say that the same team is not up to standard for playing Australia.
What possible reason could they give for allowing Zim to play SL and then say they are not good enough to play Aus.

Not only that but if WI recieve a couple of more floggings they might take away their test status.

Until that last sentence, you had a point, then you made yourself look silly.

 

[Scallywag]

Until that last sentence, you had a point, then you made yourself look silly.

Until the last word you had a point then something about pots and kettles........

 

[Ford_GTHO351]

They should either play or sent them (Australians) home.

I mean they should not scrape the Tests and replace them with ODI's, whats the point of that.

Its either one or the other (play or scrap the tour) IMO.

 

[Kenny]

I'll have a whinge - SL batsman get a chance to score a couple of double hundreds, Murali gets a few cheap wickets, and now they decide the 'sanctity' of test cricket is under threat?
That's just great. You all know by now what I think is threatening the sanctity of test cricket.....and it ain't Zimbabwe!

 

[luckyeddie]

I'll have a whinge - SL batsman get a chance to score a couple of double hundreds, Murali gets a few cheap wickets, and now they decide the 'sanctity' of test cricket is under threat?
That's just great. You all know by now what I think is threatening the sanctity of test cricket.....and it ain't Zimbabwe!

Fair comment....

But some of us were all for stopping the Sri Lankan tour, the English tour...

 

[Kenny]

An equally fair comment, as I have come to expect.

 

[badgerhair]

I'll have a whinge - SL batsman get a chance to score a couple of double hundreds, Murali gets a few cheap wickets, and now they decide the 'sanctity' of test cricket is under threat?
That's just great. You all know by now what I think is threatening the sanctity of test cricket.....and it ain't Zimbabwe!

So, how was anyone to *know* that a Zimbabwe team selected on a racial basis was going to be utterly carp until they had actually played a game or two, may I ask?

If it is the ZCU's stated view that the up-and-coming black players were at least as good as the honkies, and the only reason people didn't see that was because they had been unfairly held back, then who are we to gainsay them until there has been some evidence of how dreadful they are in reality?

The history of cricket is littered with embarrassing disasters afflicting the "most powerful team ever to leave England/Australia/India...." and extraordinary performances by teams thought to be the weakest fielded by England/Australia/India... in decades. Just because it was possible to look at the Zimbo youngster's f-c records and realise that they were *probably* not up to much, it would have been hellishly patronising to *assume* that they were no good until they'd had their own chances to prove it.

There's little doubt that when England first played Test cricket against South Africa and New Zealand, the NZ and SA teams were barely of minor county standard. But they got better, and people don't bother trying to expunge those ghastly mismatches from the books either - they just didn't bother to play against them very much - how many Tests were there between Australia and NZ between 1931 and 1971?

ICC threatening dire penalties on countries which don't want to take part in farcical matches is not a method for maintaining international cricket as the kind of special occasion which commands premium pricing for gate money and TV rights, and it's the fact that places like India have got better ways of making money than to host matches which nobody will attend or watch on TV that has finally made ICC realise that something has to be done about the racists who run the ZCU, not that ICC is prepared to take a moral stand. Under the present ICC regime, there would have been no boycott of South Africa, and they'd still be picking whites-only teams.

Cheers,

Mike

 

[Kenny]

So, how was anyone to *know* that a Zimbabwe team selected on a racial basis was going to be utterly carp until they had actually played a game or two, may I ask?

If it is the ZCU's stated view that the up-and-coming black players were at least as good as the honkies, and the only reason people didn't see that was because they had been unfairly held back, then who are we to gainsay them until there has been some evidence of how dreadful they are in reality?

Gee Mike - I don't think even the Aussies would be too flash without their best 15 players in the side mate - whaddya need a slide rule or something?