Morons who go put themselves and others lives in danger for no reason:
As some may know, there is yet another cyclone (Cyclone Hamish) to hit North Queensland, which has also hit Central Queensland as well. Even though I'm in the South East, we still see some of the weather, which has bought rain, strong southerly's, and out in the ocean, massive swells. All this is fine, except the people who look after people when they are on the beach, lifesavers, decide that the conditions are too dangerous and shut the beach. They do it for a reason, not for a laugh, but we still get ****wits who ignore the warnings and the fact that the beach is shut, and still go for a wim, and if they get into trouble, they expect the lifesavers to run in and risk their lives to save some ****. Here is what they should do, if ***** do that, then they should be given a hefty bill for your rescue. Aside from putting your life in danger, you have risked the lives of others to save your life, and I don't see why you should just get away from it without learning a lesson and sending a message to others.
When you see someone aged 13/14 upwards on a girls bike.
The first question what pops up is "Why are they on a bike thats too small for them and painted in pink barbie symbols?" And theres only two real possibilities. One, there bike is broke and they've borrowed there sisters (which is unlikely) or two, they stole it. Well done you've stolen from someone half your age and size.
Everyone wants to change the world, noone wants to change himself.
Had my bike stolen from school when i was 9...was devastated tstl, thanks for opening old wounds cdm
Avatar now by choice. 5-0 in the Ashes and all.
For our Asian studies course, we have to make two posts a week on a forum about anything to do with Asia. This was someone's valuable contribution:
Don't think I've ever spent longer writing a response.Cricket is the Cause of South Asia's Problems - An Incredibly Rational Opinion Blog
I don't pretend to be an expert on the affairs of Pakistan, India and Sri Lanka, but I think
it is safe to say that in light of recent events (ie: the attack on the cricketers in Lahore,
the public ascension of former Pakistani cricket player, Imran Khan) that in these areas
cricket and politics (as opposed to religion and politics which seems to be another big no-
no around the world) certainly come hand-in-hand.
The fact that Islamic extremists are now putting in their two cents on matters regarding
cricket certainly isn't a great public relations booster for the ICC - the International
Cricket Council (not to be confused with the International Criminal Court, although it is
my hope that the members of the Cricket Council will one day face justice for overseeing
such a disgrace of a game).
Cricket, being what is nothing more than a vestige of British colonialism, bearing bad
memories about the tyranny of the Raj, seems to be doing more harm than good in the
South Asian area.
In light of other recent developments, such as the potential security issues surrounding a
cricket tour in Sri Lanka (owing to activity from the Tamil Tigers in that area), I think it is
safe to say that South Asia, and probably the world, would be alot better off if it were, to
steal from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's comments about Israel, "committed to the ash-heap
Let's see the response...
If it doesn't end with "maybe you could visit www.cricketweb.net for more information. Check out the forums!" I will be disappointed
RIP Fardin Qayyumi (AKA "cricket player"; "Bob"), 1/11/1990 - 15/4/2006
Christopher, I'm afraid I have to pretty much completely disagree with
you. Yes, cricket and politics are very closely linked in the
subcontinental countries that play the game; team performances are been
discussed in Indian parliament, while Imran Khan was convinced to return
to the captaincy for the 1988 tour of the West Indies by the Pakistani
president (which Pakistan won, for those playing along at home). This
isn't necessarily a bad thing, more just a representation of just how
loved cricket is amongst those countries. Peter Garrett managed to
become a politician in Australia, but that doesn't mean rock music is
bad for politics.
The fact is though, cricket has often been almost the only thing
that the countries, most specifically India and Pakistan, have in
common. Before 2004, India hadn't toured to Pakistan since 1989, thanks
to the dispute over Kashmir. Since then, even George Bush and Condoleeza
Rice have commented on the sort of 'cricket diplomacy' that came about
from it. To quote an article from Cricinfo about the tour (
Cricinfo - An affair to remember ) :
"Indian and Pakistani fans painted their faces with one another's
colours, the national flags - the ultimate symbol of a nation's
sovereignty and pride - were stitched together, the Indian flag
fluttered proudly in stands and on the streets of Karachi and Lahore,
Laxmipathy Balaji had his name chanted in the stadium after he had
dismissed a Pakistani batsmen, and while Pakistan mourned the loss of
their team, emotions never turned ugly, and Indians were applauded at
every ground. In hotels and on the streets, taxi drivers, bell boys,
gatekeepers - the people often generalised as ordinary, and whose
assumed will is often brandished as an impediment to a solution to the
Kashmir issue - have gone out of the way to extend the hand of
friendship, while terming the K issue inconsequential."
Similar to the 'ping-pong diplomacy' between USA and China, cricket
provides India and Pakistan that sort of common link that two countries
caught up in dispute like Kashmir need. To suggest that it should be
done away is simply naive. Also, not only does it help in these
political issues, but like someone commented last week, sport provides
an outlet for people to get away from their problems and simply have
fun, whether they be playing the game or just watching it. In countries
like Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, India and Pakistan with high levels of
poverty, such a thing is essential for the people- just take a look at
the mass celebrations in the streets whenever Bangladesh manages to pull
one over one of the bigger countries and actually win a game.
Finally, I particularly disagreed with this line: "Cricket, being what
is nothing more than a vestige of British colonialism, bearing bad
memories about the tyranny of the Raj."
Certainly, to begin with, cricket was a British institution, but it's
moved far, far away from its beginnings as a game played only between
England, Australia and South Africa in the late 1800s. That said,
cricket has long been a way around racism and political problems; the
first Australian cricket team to go on tour was an aboriginal team,the ICC voted
to boycott apartheid-era South Africa from 1970, one of the first sports to do
so, and just 15 days after the 2004 Boxing Day Tsunami, players from all
around the world played a charity game at the MCG and raised about 17
million (AUD). And, finally,the true centre of cricket has moved away from
Britain and firmly towards India- look at the hugely lucrative IPL franchise
in India, the management of the game now by the ICC and not the MCC,
and the fact that the ICC headquarters have been located in Dubai since 2005.
In short, I can't see how any good at all would be gained from getting
rid of cricket from the area. Sport in general offers so much to the
world, with cricket holding a special place in the subcontinent region,
and to suggest that it should be done away with simply because a few
extremists attacked a cricket team is a huge overreaction. If cricket
wasn't played in Pakistan, it's not as if the extremists wouldn't have
targeted a hockey team or politicians instead. It's just that they
happened to be the biggest profile target at the time.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)