*Official* First Test at Swalec Stadium, Cardiff

[GIMH]

awtgimh's deleted post.

Restore it if you want

 

[four_or_six]

No its just huffing and puffing by small minds, Its a test match not a tea party.

If it was any other player it would be a non issue not even a second thought, but as you can see by the way you try to be even more outraged by calling Ponting "an enraged chimp" just shows how people react simply because it is Ponting.

But you missed the point of my post anyway which also shows how people are so willing to attack Ponting without even reading what is written first.

What would be interesting is a comparison of Ponting's behaviour to the umpire with that of Shakib al Hasan, because the latter was also the captain and was fined. As long as the rules are applied consistently then it's fine.

Anyway, for me, it's not that I want Ponting fined. It's more that I found his comments in the press conference highly amusing in the face of the way he had behaved on the pitch. But I hope we see him behaving that way on the pitch again, because usually when I see him acting up like that it's a good sign things are going the way of the opposition. Certainly when I saw his appeal to Aleem Dar, it gave me a lot of hope that we could save the game.

 

[Son Of Coco]

As a matter of fact, I do believe he is a reasonably honest person by himself but he seems to seriously believe that most of what his side does is always within the spirit of the game but in reality, it isn't... I have said this earlier... I do think he is the type of guy who might walk if the fielder says he did catch it but so many in his own team won't. So why does he keep invoking "spirit of cricket" when he is talking about his team? If he says that personally he tries to play within the spirit of cricket, it might be a bit more understandable (still hypocritical, but at least understandable) but the number of times he claims his side plays according to the spirit of the game is really trying, from an outsider's perspective... As an Aussie, obviously, you may feel differently and if it was from an Indian, I may feel differently too, but it is just tiring to see him keep talking about the spirit of the game and how much his side upholds it.

I don't think he does actually believe this. Nothing in any of his comments indicate this to me. I don't think he's constantly talking about the spirit of cricket either. I don't recall him bringing it up that often. I think he had every right to bring it up here. If you couldn't say anything because you or someone in your team has done something against the spirit of the game then there's not a team competing in international cricket at the moment that could say anything...ever.

As a few have said, including Nasser Hussain, England's efforts to waste time were blatant and amateurish. They obviously messed up with their timing and someone realised way too late that they needed to take up some time. Instead of copping it on the chin they tried to rectify that with the farce that followed. Strauss and his management team were out-captained basically from the start. This was another example of that and their reaction to it outlined the problems they have.

To have come out and said nothing about it when asked would have defied any rational belief.

 

[pup11]

To add to what SoC just said, I think lot of people are making a big deal about what Ponting said, Ponting was clearly trying to get under the skin of the English team, he probably just wanted to take a bit of gloss off over what they achieved at Cardiff on day 5.

Though what England did is pretty much common practice these days, but still its hard to expect any opposition captain to be amused about it, Ponting never said that England's tactics changed the outcome of the game or anything, he just said it was poor form on their part, and I don't see a problem with what he said.

Now lot of people in argument to this would say that, Ponting isn't a saint himself, well he isn't, but he gets criticised for just about anything, by former players, current players, fans and critics, then as an opposition captain Ricky too has every right to speak-out against something he feels isn't right.

I don't think Ponting would have made much fuss about this incident, if the English would have used the tactic smartly, but during the last stages of the game, the English physio running around on the field haplessly with no reason made the whole thing look pretty obvious and intentional, which is something its not supposed to look like.

 

[honestbharani]

I don't think he does actually believe this. Nothing in any of his comments indicate this to me. I don't think he's constantly talking about the spirit of cricket either. I don't recall him bringing it up that often. I think he had every right to bring it up here. If you couldn't say anything because you or someone in your team has done something against the spirit of the game then there's not a team competing in international cricket at the moment that could say anything...ever.

As a few have said, including Nasser Hussain, England's efforts to waste time were blatant and amateurish. They obviously messed up with their timing and someone realised way too late that they needed to take up some time. Instead of copping it on the chin they tried to rectify that with the farce that followed. Strauss and his management team were out-captained basically from the start. This was another example of that and their reaction to it outlined the problems they have.

To have come out and said nothing about it when asked would have defied any rational belief.

You keep missing the point. I am fine with what he said about England's time wasting. I think most teams, if not all, would have done the same but he has a right to be annoyed by that. Just the same way Strauss would have been annoyed had Ponting did it to his team... But it is that "spirit of cricket" comment that I find to be more than a little hypocritical...



And I don't know.. I have seen him use the term quite a few times in his interviews and during the two series against India this thing came up quite a bit. I still think he uses it more than the other captains do and he always uses it when talking about his side rather than himself, as an individual... That is the impression I have, as an outsider.

 

[honestbharani]

But as I have allready pointed out the claims you made about what Ponting said are false so there is absolutely no substance to your claims. You cant bag a player based on a complete fabrication.

Ok, he didn't tell the word "always" but the implication was there, right? And even if he was only talking about THIS test match, there was still that appeal incident and a few others which showed they weren't always playing "by the spirit of the game"...

 

[Scaly piscine]

I don't think he does actually believe this. Nothing in any of his comments indicate this to me. I don't think he's constantly talking about the spirit of cricket either.

Oh give over, he's the only one that ever mentions the spirit of cricket and he does it pretty much every series.

 

[Uppercut]

and apparently in Ireland "walking" is the same as "charging"...

This is charging.

Ricky Ponting did not do this.

 

[GIMH]

[I or T] to move forward quickly and violently, especially towards something which has caused difficulty or annoyance:

If the shoe fits, I'll wear it

 

[pup11]

This is charging.

Rhino Ponting did not do this.

Fixed....

 

[pup11]

You keep missing the point. I am fine with what he said about England's time wasting. I think most teams, if not all, would have done the same but he has a right to be annoyed by that. Just the same way Strauss would have been annoyed had Ponting did it to his team... But it is that "spirit of cricket" comment that I find to be more than a little hypocritical...



And I don't know.. I have seen him use the term quite a few times in his interviews and during the two series against India this thing came up quite a bit. I still think he uses it more than the other captains do and he always uses it when talking about his side rather than himself, as an individual... That is the impression I have, as an outsider.

What's wrong in talking about that mate, if Ponting would have been doing something against the spirit of the game, the officials would have taken action against him by now.

He is an emotionally charged individual, and during the heat of the moment his body language might look a bit grumpy and aggressive, but that doesn't mean he is running around abusing anyone in his line of sight or doing anything against the rules.

 

[Scaly piscine]

What's wrong in talking about that mate, if Ponting would have been doing something against the spirit of the game, the officials would have taken action against him by now.

He is an emotionally charged individual, and during the heat of the moment his body language might look a bit grumpy and aggressive, but that doesn't mean he is running around abusing anyone in his line of sight or doing anything against the rules.

Should I bother highlighting the millions of examples of going against the spirit of the game where the officials have done bugger all or have you seen how utterly broken your argument is yet?

 

[Son Of Coco]

You keep missing the point. I am fine with what he said about England's time wasting. I think most teams, if not all, would have done the same but he has a right to be annoyed by that. Just the same way Strauss would have been annoyed had Ponting did it to his team... But it is that "spirit of cricket" comment that I find to be more than a little hypocritical...



And I don't know.. I have seen him use the term quite a few times in his interviews and during the two series against India this thing came up quite a bit. I still think he uses it more than the other captains do and he always uses it when talking about his side rather than himself, as an individual... That is the impression I have, as an outsider.

I'm not missing the point at all, just responding to what you said. I already commented on the spirit of cricket thing. Thought I did so in the post you have just quoted. I think that would indicate I get the point. I disagree though.

'As an outsider' isn't a valid disclaimer if it's someone you don't like

 

[four_or_six]

What's wrong in talking about that mate, if Ponting would have been doing something against the spirit of the game, the officials would have taken action against him by now.
He is an emotionally charged individual, and during the heat of the moment his body language might look a bit grumpy and aggressive, but that doesn't mean he is running around abusing anyone in his line of sight or doing anything against the rules.

Likewise Strauss. End of argument.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Oh give over, he's the only one that ever mentions the spirit of cricket and he does it pretty much every series.

Really? I very much doubt that. He said 'spirit of the game' if I remember correctly. Quite sure other captains refer to the game being played in the right spirit.

Pretty much every series? Isn't it fortunate Scrabble doesn't require the use of factual information to score a win.

Choke down that 14th lard butty and stop being so irritable. You don't like Ponting. You've been given the points for the triple letter score already. Lets move on.

EDIT: No offence intended of course

 

[BoyBrumby]

haha, missed Uppercuts point entirely.

Uppercut, god bless him, is playing rather fast and free with l'actualité tho, see below:

This is charging.

Ricky Ponting did not do this.

If one defines "charging" in such narrow terms, then maybe he wasn't. But then no human is capable of it either. If, however, one defines it as the more accepted "rushing towards something", then he obviously was.

As I've said, if one considers blatant shows of dissent (and, again, it was) acceptable, then all well and good. I, however, do not and when the dissenter then invokes the spirit of the game it makes him a humbug in my book.

& this post is in no way an attmept to obscure the fact we indulged in blatant and shoddy time wasting and played like shyte either, least its meaning be misconstrued.

 

[Matt79]

ffs - let it die already

 

[Uppercut]

In the interests in finding the true implication of the word "charged" in this context, I decided to consult a neutral, uninformed source.


william. says:
hey jaya
Jaya says:
heylo
william. says:
if i told you that someone had "charged" me when we were playing a sport
william. says:
what would you think had happened?
Jaya says:
Well either they did some variation of a tackle, or they somehow managed to electrocute you.
Jaya says:
Were you tased?
Jaya says:
Was it a policeman?
Jaya says:
Were you molested by a tasing policeman while playing football?



I think we can conclude that the word "charged" most certainly has implications other than walking towards someone while looking angry.

 

[pup11]

Likewise Strauss. End of argument.

Yeah that's pretty much how I see things too, but a lot of people are making it sound like as if, Ponting just jumped into the pc and before anyone uttered a word he started criticising the English side, he would have obviously been asked about his views regarding this and he expressed his opinion on the matter, its as simple as that.

Whether you agree with what he said or not depends on one's personal opinion, but don't know why, what Ponting did in the past should be brought up in all of this.

 

[Son Of Coco]

In the interests in finding the true implication of the word "charged" in this context, I decided to consult a neutral, uninformed source.


william. says:
hey jaya
Jaya says:
heylo
william. says:
if i told you that someone had "charged" me when we were playing a sport
william. says:
what would you think had happened?
Jaya says:
Well either they did some variation of a tackle, or they somehow managed to electrocute you.
Jaya says:
Were you tased?
Jaya says:
Was it a policeman?
Jaya says:
Were you molested by a tasing policeman while playing football?



I think we can conclude that the word "charged" most certainly has implications other than walking towards someone while looking angry.