Venting

[NZTailender]

As far as I understand things, the correct way to Vent about a CW related problem is to get banned and cry to your parents about it.

Just for that, I won't tell you what I thought about the new Doctor Who episode.

 

[Prince EWS]

I reported a post that I considered a bait... Facts not too hard to understand, I tend to feel...

Well, the moderators didn't consider it to be a bait. AFAIC Burgey was merely posting his opinion - an opinion that many disagreed with, indeed, but a valid (not necessarily correct, of course, but legitimate) opinion about something genuinely cricket-related. You may think he was trying to get a certain reaction: I do not; I think he just posted what he thought.

If you disagree with him then you're quite within you rights to call the post stupid (IMO anyway - other mods may disagree) as long as it's the post you're calling stupid and not the member. The problem wasn't with that as such, though, but that the debate had already got out of hand and a moderator had already requested that it end. If you want to avoid getting threads closed, I suggest you read each thread to the end before replying, as opposed to your current MO of replying to each post as you read it. Often posts are initially poorly worded then cleared up later or, like in this case, sub-topics get out of hand and are burnt out by moderators to get the thread back on track.

 

[HeathDavisSpeed]

Quite right. As a moderator (or at least someone very important in the CW hierarchy) once said, "Attack the post, not the poster" or some other bull****.

 

[Burgey]

Right, here goes.

First of all, HB, Sir Alex and Cevno. If I offended you by questioning a part of the culture of Indian cricket, I apologise.

But it's a legitimate point to raise. I see an umpiring error, some see alien abductions. I see a crap lbw, others see a new world order. That's fine, whatever.

I raised the issue of whether there was a victims complex in Indian cricket as, I thought, a legitimate question. If someone says to me there is an underlying arrogance in Australian cricket, I don't take it as a sleight at me or at Australian people. Rather, in that case, it's right, and it's bitten them on the ass quite a few times.

I really don't see what the issue is with asking it as a question. And for the record HB, in that post where you quoted me ad nauseum, you very cleverly but disingenuously quoted me selectively re. the victim complex issue. you, plainly deliberately, left out the parts where I said this was my perception as an outsider and it may well be wrong. That's intellectually dishonest and more than a little disappointing.

And I don't see the problen with using the term "Indian cricket" in a collective sense, but again, if that's caused offence to you guys, then sorry.

I still think Ganguly is a **** though, and not because he complained about Bucknor. I just think he is. I thought it was pretty obvious that my issue wasn't with his complaining about Bucknor, but maybe I didn't.

Surely you don't think I was being racist in raising that point? You ask for specific examples - a living, breathing one is Gavaskar imo - from his walk off to his appalling auto-biography and his playing the race card when he can. The complaints about Bucknor I find in a similar victimisation-type way, but I understand you disagree. By far the worst was Kumble post-Sydney 07 though who, about two tests after verbally abusing Mo-Yo in the middle of a test before getting him out then celebrating how his ploy worked, walked off in Sydney and complained about the spirit of cricket.

Anyway, there are three examples that stick in my mind. I raise them only because you asked me to. When I think of things like this iand read posts along the line of "we wuz robbed", I don't see the problem with raising whether it was a problem in Indian cricket.

And as I said before, I may well be completely wrong, but I was waiting for someone to either agree or not. It wasn't a flame bait, it wasn't an attempt to troll. If that was the case I'd have raised it about two years ago when I first thought of it, instead of waiting til now to raise it.

But anyway, again, if I offended you I'm sorry. I'm sorry you saw fit to report it too.

But I stand by it. I think it's a reasonable question to ask.

 

[silentstriker]

Is it victim mentality if you're actually a victim? I certainly think Bucknor was biased. To me it's clear as hell that it was, and in any other sport, he'd have been booted long before Sydneygate, but umpires are still sacrosanct in cricket.

But I don't really care if people bring up the question of victim mentality, and really, I agree with it in many cases. I've noticed this too, and it's been used to make excuses and play the victim in many cases where it was patently either just bad luck or their own faults. Many Indian fans, public, and media are totally precious at any slight, perceived or real, against India. It gets quite annoying, and people take it personally. I am going to defend Burgey 100% in this - it is a perfectly legitimate question to ask. If you disagree with it, say so, or leave it alone. It wasn't done to incite, and even if it was, just report it and forget about it. It's not that big a deal, certainly not worth getting into a fuss about - people's opinions on your cricket team have no bearing on your life.

And I am not speaking to HB as I did not read the thread, and now I don't really care to, but people do get way too defensive about the smallest things. People need to let it slide a lot more.

Did not apply in Sydney - India really wuz robbed. And they came back next Test and won - and went something like 3-0 in the next eight Tests vs. Australia, so that's a positive.


And Ganguly = best guy ever.


Anyway, that's my piece. I'm done and out.

 

[GotSpin]

Was tempted to make a whole post of responses but apparently if you present an alternative viewpoint or opinion to a matter that is disagreeing with another poster I'm simply 'baiting' them.

 

[Sanz]

i still think ganguly is a **** though, and not because he complained about bucknor. I just think he is. I thought it was pretty obvious that my issue wasn't with his complaining about bucknor, but maybe i didn't.

a living, breathing one is gavaskar imo - from his walk off to his appalling auto-biography and his playing the race card when he can.

. By far the worst was kumble post-sydney 07 though who, about two tests after verbally abusing mo-yo in the middle of a test before getting him out then celebrating how his ploy worked, walked off in sydney and complained about the spirit of cricket..

 

[honestbharani]

Was tempted to make a whole post of responses but apparently if you present an alternative viewpoint or opinion to a matter that is disagreeing with another poster I'm simply 'baiting' them.

lol... that would be the case if my posts were called "baiting"...


Anyways, Burgey, mate, you know I have a world of respect for you. Most times the only guys I argue with here are the ones whose opinion I respect. Otherwise, I don't even take the pain to discuss... And as it should have been clear from the way I get on with guys like Ikki, with whom I disagree on so much but still respect so much, I never mean to let an argument come in the way of how I rate a person's posts based on other things.


For the issue at hand, my point all along was, regardless of what impression Sourav may have created, when an international captain and coach call an umpire biased in their feedback, I think you should act on it.


Secondly, Got_Spin was going on about how bad a name Sourav has gained for himself and all he could do was quote Engel in Wisden. I have said that contemporaries like Lara, Sachin and Murali rate him as a great guy and therefore, there is no reason to think he was sulking or pushing the blame to another or some other junk thing.. The point is, there have been other umpires who have even more glaring errors that has hurt India but no one has ever accused them of bias. This kind of bias and stuff, you can only feel by being out there in the thick of the action, IMO and therefore, I took exception to some of the nonsense of his..


You may think Sourav is ****. I personally think quite a few of the Aussie cricketers I have met over here are worse than ****... There are champs like Warne, Slater, Kasper, McGrath and Hayden (when in the good mood) but there are real ****s too... That doesn't mean I won't consider it if a Steve Waugh or Symonds, being captain, complain that an umpire is biased against them. That has been my point all along and if you had cared to read through my responses to Zaremba's or other moderate posts in the topic, you should have seen it. I am sorry, but it just appeared to me that in that thread you were a little too keen on getting in some stupid smart ass comments and shots at Ganguly and Indian cricket fans than on actually arguing something. That is why I reported your posts and that is that.


I see from Prince EWS' response that they think you didn't cross any line but I don't think I did either and looks like only GF among the mods thinks I did in that post... So it is all cool. If I had been a mod, I would have surely thrown out an advise post asking you to refrain, Burgey.. And I was surprised that didn't happen. I gave back a reply that your posts deserved, AFAIC and I was again surprised that some mod that it was worthy of a caution and hence started this topic.


Now that we all know where we stand, I guess we can leave it for now... And for future reference, I would definitely NOT like to see opinions such as "victim mentality" thrown around... From any side. I know it is probably being ultra sensitive but it came across to me as a slur and I am sure it would for most of the Indian fans here... Being sensitive is gonna hurt no one.

 

[GotSpin]

I addressed your points and offered different arguments and viewpoints and all you do is to continue to ignore them as forms of trolling since they differ from your own.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, the moderators didn't consider it to be a bait. AFAIC Burgey was merely posting his opinion - an opinion that many disagreed with, indeed, but a valid (not necessarily correct, of course, but legitimate) opinion about something genuinely cricket-related. You may think he was trying to get a certain reaction: I do not; I think he just posted what he thought.

If you disagree with him then you're quite within you rights to call the post stupid (IMO anyway - other mods may disagree) as long as it's the post you're calling stupid and not the member. The problem wasn't with that as such, though, but that the debate had already got out of hand and a moderator had already requested that it end. If you want to avoid getting threads closed, I suggest you read each thread to the end before replying, as opposed to your current MO of replying to each post as you read it. Often posts are initially poorly worded then cleared up later or, like in this case, sub-topics get out of hand and are burnt out by moderators to get the thread back on track.

Fair enough mate.. That, I will certainly do.. But FTR, no one had responded to the post and I indeed do think Burgey's opinion on the matter was stupid and so no reason for me to NOT respond to that again, is there? If you don't want a response, you could simply delete the post or edit it out. If it was fair, it is also fair that someone responds right? Or you prefer, we simply open a new thread for such disagreements everytime and take it there?


And FWIW, I still think accusing "MASSIVE victim mentality in Indian Cricket and its supporters" is baiting. If you think such a post will NOT get a reaction and just have a mod telling everyone not to talk about it further, you are living in a dream... The post is such that it would get reactions, so don't stop it if you are not going to caution the poster or edit the post first... Now, OTOH, IF GF or some other mod had asked Burgey to refrain from posting inflammatory remarks and then asked us to get back on topic, then yes, it would have made sense for GF to post what he did. That is my opinion of it anyway. If I was a mod, that is how it would have ended.. And having been here for almost 6 years and seen a number of deabtes and issues, I think I am being fair enough in how I want it to be handled...

 

[honestbharani]

I addressed your points and offered different arguments and viewpoints and all you do is to continue to ignore them as forms of trolling since they differ from your own.

If I thought you were a troll, I won't have responded to you mate..


But apart from Engel and 3 instances which were more like reactions to previous incidents on Sourav's part, you came up with zilch.

 

[Uppercut]

Just because a post is likely to provoke a reaction doesn't mean it's trolling. If my genuine opinion is that Sachin Tendulkar is crap, that's likely to provoke a massive reaction, but it doesn't mean I should be reprimanded just for saying it. Quality posters like Burgey aren't obliged to steer clear of expressing some perfectly legitimate opinions on the grounds that a few trolls might get sand in their ******s as a result. If he thinks Indian cricket has a victim mentality then he's allowed to say so, and if people might get offended by his perfectly valid opinion, that's their problem and not his.

 

[GotSpin]

If I thought you were a troll, I won't have responded to you mate..


But apart from Engel and 3 instances which were more like reactions to previous incidents on Sourav's part, you came up with zilch.

I came up with a number of incidents even though you restricted me to pre-2003.

I also provided arguments as to why greats like Lara, Sachin and Murali rate him as a great guy to use your words and why this isn't a relevant reflection of his character

 

[Sanz]

quality posters like burgey aren't obliged to steer clear of expressing some perfectly legitimate opinions on the grounds that a few trolls might get sand in their ******s as a result. If he thinks indian cricket has a victim mentality then he's allowed to say so, and if people might get offended by his perfectly valid opinion, that's their problem and not his.

 

[honestbharani]

I came up with a number of incidents even though you restricted me to pre-2003.

I also provided arguments as to why greats like Lara, Sachin and Murali rate him as a great guy to use your words and why this isn't a relevant reflection of his character

Mate, I understand what you said but I also provided you the reasons for the incidents and the reason why someone like Engel's opinion should not be the be all and end all of judging some cricketers' character.


Do you seriously think it is not possible that Sourav may not be that bad? I mean, how many captains have complained of him anyway?

 

[honestbharani]

Just because a post is likely to provoke a reaction doesn't mean it's trolling. If my genuine opinion is that Sachin Tendulkar is crap, that's likely to provoke a massive reaction, but it doesn't mean I should be reprimanded just for saying it. Quality posters like Burgey aren't obliged to steer clear of expressing some perfectly legitimate opinions on the grounds that a few trolls might get sand in their ******s as a result. If he thinks Indian cricket has a victim mentality then he's allowed to say so, and if people might get offended by his perfectly valid opinion, that's their problem and not his.

First of all, I never said Burgey was "trolling".. So I don't see where that came from.


Secondly, if you post something that would trigger reactions, you either accept those reactionary posts or you simply caution the initial post/poster and then move on. Neither happened in this case and that is why I feel it was not proper moderation.


Thirdly, the rest of your post is BS as is usual when you are talking of an issue you have no idea about.

 

[GIMH]

Cracking contributions there Sanz.

Good to see hb playing the poster not the post RE Uppercut as well.

The irony of this whole thread is not lost on me, sadly.

Secondly, if you post something that would trigger reactions, you either accept those reactionary posts or you simply caution the initial post/poster and then move on. Neither happened in this case and that is why I feel it was not proper moderation.

So what you're saying is that mods should clamp down on posts that trigger reactions? LOL.

 

[GotSpin]

Mate, I understand what you said but I also provided you the reasons for the incidents and the reason why someone like Engel's opinion should not be the be all and end all of judging some cricketers' character.


Do you seriously think it is not possible that Sourav may not be that bad? I mean, how many captains have complained of him anyway?

It is the general impression I got from him, particularly during the latter part of his career when he wasn't quite the star that he was in his younger years

 

[honestbharani]

Cracking contributions there Sanz.

Good to see hb playing the poster not the post RE Uppercut as well.

The irony of this whole thread is not lost on me, sadly.



So what you're saying is that mods should clamp down on posts that trigger reactions? LOL.

You thik UC was playing the post at any point above?

 

[GIMH]

He addressed the discussion points and stated his opinions...