Andre Nel and sledging

[viktor]

Okay. let me be more precise : I have a very strong dislike of swearing directed at players.
I have a moderate dislike of swearing without targetting.
And no, it creates no extra meaning by saying ' you are a ****ing mother****ing ****sucking lucky git'...just creates a whole lotta uncouthness.
I can get an intent across without using offensive terminology. Surely, thats not very hard.

Ah. so you wouldn't be as offended if someone said "That ****ing mother****ing ****sucking lucky git"?

 

[C_C]

You are changing goal-posts now C_C. Earlier in the thread you said you had problems with swearing because it would affect the kids. How is swearing at nobody in particular not going to affect them the same way?

No i am not changing the goalposts.
Ideally, i would like NO swearing. Period. But i would settle for atleast non directed swearing.

 

[Son Of Coco]

How about this novel idea : BAN sledging !

People keep saying sledging is a part of the game - i fail to see how this part is anything apart from 'deseased and festering'.

There seems to be this idea going around that sledging has only existed since you could hear it on a microphone. It doesn't represent 'diseased and festering', it's been a part of the game for a long, long time and is something that's very difficult to remove I suppose. Again, it depends on your definition of sledging too I suppose. In my opinion everything that's said is sledging in one form or another and I don't mind an opponent saying something if he thinks that'll help them out - most of the time it's hardly worth wasting breath on anyway. The other side of the coin is abuse, and I don't agree with that on a cricket field. I think that's what the fines system and suspensions are in place to prevent. I heard Warne talking to Smith on the microphones and can't see how anything he said would offend anyone, or put anyone off their game .

I think the main problem with this is when couch-bound viewers in desperate need of a hobby decide they're going to get upset everytime someone speaks on the field. Cricketers are professional sportsmen, and cricket is their job. I get upset at work sometimes when things don't go well...

 

[Son Of Coco]

In that case, i am sure you have no problems if the IOC chief, announcing (hypothetically) the next olympic games at Sydney says ' And the next game will be held in ****ing Australia'.
I am not interested in semantics really.
You know perfectly that ****ing can be used in a very derogatory way and the context in this case is highly derogatory.



Actually thanks for pointing that out. Yes, lucky git is offensive too.
My entire point is, the reason sports is degenerating more and more into violent or antagonistic behaviour is because people are trying harder and harder to win at all costs.
They forget - winning isnt important. They are there primarily to entertain the crowd.
I am beginning to like the idea of amatuerising sports more and more every passing day.
Way too much attention, resources and money being thrown for whacking a whole different kinda balls with different kinda sticks.
Perhaps 'back to the 1880s' wouldnt be too bad an idea for cricket.

i.e: before microphones

 

[C_C]

i.e: before microphones

Dude, microphones or not, the sledging out there is getting far more personal, abusive and plain ol uncouth.
If you cant see that, i suggest you go watch the standard-fare matches from the 80s, particularly involving the windies....several opposition players are on record saying that the WI went through their matches HARDLY uttering a word towards the opposition.
Thats a far more classy and respectabel stance than a buncha hooligans in the middle of the pitch.

 

[honestbharani]

sledging isn't about abusing people

it is. You are confusing sledging with good humoured banter, which is always fine. But the line HAS to be drawn somewhere. The Aussies asking the stump mics to be turned off so that they can sledge as much as they want is ridiculous to say the least.

 

[honestbharani]

I think the point is that they were swearing on the field (which is obviously not against the rules) and they didn't want there to be censorship issues with it coming through over the stump mics.

My point is they shouldn't be swearing on the pitch so much.

 

[honestbharani]

So it's ok to throw a cricket ball but not to throw a few expletives?

yes, because otherwise there won't be a breed called "bowlers"...

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

My point is they shouldn't be swearing on the pitch so much.

Well, why not? Swearing isn't against the rules, so I don't see why people should be prohibited from doing it. It's not like anyone can hear them except the umpires and the other players.

 

[honestbharani]

A part of the game is psychological. Sledging someone pertains to the psychological duel. Insults, petty and racist are one thing. Sportsman-like I like, it shows the hunger and the fight in the 'dog'. For example, Warne taunting Smith by calling him a 'Young'n". That's sport, in any competitive arena it exists. If players cannot take these kind of remarks, they should have stayed in home economics classes more often.

The line has to be drawn when the abuse gets personal. I don't how it works in Australia, but back home here in India, using terms like b*stard and b*tch are extremely extremely derogatory. People don't mind abuses hurled at them but when it is targetted at the families, they do get annoyed. And since cricket is a global game, respect SHOULD be given to the cultures of all countries playing it.


Personally, I am fine with cricketing abuse and insults on a players' ability or the lack of it (I think the Richards to McDermott thing fits in this category) but it SHOULD NOT get personal. BTW, by cricketing abuse, I mean that abusing a player for his cricket and cricket abilities and stuff. Other stuff has to be penalized and penalized heavily.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

it is. You are confusing sledging with good humoured banter, which is always fine. But the line HAS to be drawn somewhere. The Aussies asking the stump mics to be turned off so that they can sledge as much as they want is ridiculous to say the least.

They can already sledge as much as they want. They asked the stump mics to be turned down so it wouldn't bother viewers at home, or cause censorship issues.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, why not? Swearing isn't against the rules, so I don't see why people should be prohibited from doing it. It's not like anyone can hear them except the umpires and the other players.

Look, swearing at a guy personaly is not the same as swearing at him in some cricketing context. Richards calling McDermott a f*cking coward for the way he played bouncers is acceptable, but Richards calling McDermott a f*cker who can only f*ck (that is, nothing to do with cricket, just downright personal insults) SHOULD NOT be allowed.

 

[honestbharani]

They can already sledge as much as they want. They asked the stump mics to be turned down so it wouldn't bother viewers at home, or cause censorship issues.

THAT is my problem. Not just with Australia, but with all teams around the world at the moment, they seem to think SLEDGING personally is the fashion or something. The ICC needs to clamp down on the personal insults and stuff. There is too much of it to my liking and unfortunately, it is all pioneered by Australia. The fact that Australia have been so successful has now meant that other teams are looking to do the same as well.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

The line has to be drawn when the abuse gets personal. I don't how it works in Australia, but back home here in India, using terms like b*stard and b*tch are extremely extremely derogatory. People don't mind abuses hurled at them but when it is targetted at the families, they do get annoyed. And since cricket is a global game, respect SHOULD be given to the cultures of all countries playing it.


Personally, I am fine with cricketing abuse and insults on a players' ability or the lack of it (I think the Richards to McDermott thing fits in this category) but it SHOULD NOT get personal. BTW, by cricketing abuse, I mean that abusing a player for his cricket and cricket abilities and stuff. Other stuff has to be penalized and penalized heavily.

That's fair enough, but you have to consider the enforcement. What exactly is it you are proposing to ban? You can't really write down that players will be punished by the ICC for insulting the family of another player, because it's way too specific. What if they insult their girlfriend? Or them, for that matter?

And say you forbid all abuse not specifically related to the game at hand, where does the "****ing coward" thing fall in? I mean, if it came before the match referee, Richards might have said it was about him backing away from bouncers, but that exact phrase could easily have been a personal insult unrelated to cricket.

There's just way too much grey area. You could certainly forbid all swearing and enforce that, but when you're getting into distinguishing between one type of insult and another it becomes far too complex to enforce.

 

[honestbharani]

Did you just imply that insulting someone is akin to murdering them?

Different cultures, different interpretations for insults. Here in India, you can go to court and sue a guy for his fortune if he calls you a "b*stard".

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

THAT is my problem. Not just with Australia, but with all teams around the world at the moment, they seem to think SLEDGING personally is the fashion or something. The ICC needs to clamp down on the personal insults and stuff. There is too much of it to my liking and unfortunately, it is all pioneered by Australia. The fact that Australia have been so successful has now meant that other teams are looking to do the same as well.

I'm afraid I disagree. It is certainly not all pioneered by Australia, or anything of the sort. The only reason people seek to blame Australia for sledging is because several Australian captains have been public about the fact that they believe sledging is an effective tactic to win games of cricket.

For example, Nasser Hussein was a sledger. Steve Waugh said in his book that Nasser was always talking, always commenting to the Australian players and trying to put them off. Hussein was the guy who called Graeme Smith "that guy" during a press conference, and called him "Bob" or something at the toss during a test. Certainly seems like a clear attempt to put him off his game, and the attitude of a sledger, doesn't it?

Hansie Cronje was also a sledger. Both of them were captains of opposing teams at the same time as Waugh, and yet Waugh has the reputation because he made the "mental disintegration" comments. The fact that he was honest about it doesn't make him any worse than anyone else. The West Indies sledged back in the 80s, and there's plenty of examples of even guys like Richards (who had a reputation for being pretty stoic) engaging in it, so who knows what the others said. Tony Greig had a reputation for it as well, I believe. So did Dennis Lillee and Ian Chappell, and Ian Botham and Javed Miandad... all guys who retired some time ago. The only difference is that now there are stump mics so people at home can hear all of it.

 

[honestbharani]

That's fair enough, but you have to consider the enforcement. What exactly is it you are proposing to ban? You can't really write down that players will be punished by the ICC for insulting the family of another player, because it's way too specific. What if they insult their girlfriend? Or them, for that matter?

And say you forbid all abuse not specifically related to the game at hand, where does the "****ing coward" thing fall in? I mean, if it came before the match referee, Richards might have said it was about him backing away from bouncers, but that exact phrase could easily have been a personal insult unrelated to cricket.

There's just way too much grey area. You could certainly forbid all swearing and enforce that, but when you're getting into distinguishing between one type of insult and another it becomes far too complex to enforce.

That is where umpires, refs etc. come in. I agree with you that the monitoring and the enforcement CANNOT be perfect, but this is one more instance where something will DEFINITELY be better than nothing. I think the way it should work is that players should be able to take up the issue with the umpires on the field and the match referee. If they luck out and the stuff gets caught on stump miks, then the officials can make a call on the issue themselves, without any need for anyone else intervening. Otherwise, there could be a hearing and then a judgment. The point is SOME kind of attempt should be made to at least limit these stuff. The recent RSA/Aus matches have been a joke in this regard. England and India have had their share of heated moments in the middle as well, but things never got out of hand and the series has been played in the best of spirits. To an extent, I guess the kind of captain you have matters as well. I suppose things were different with India and England back when Nasser and Sourav were in charge. But with Freddie and DRavid in charge now (both rather well behaved guys, Freddie only recently, RD all the time), that might have made a difference as well.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

That is where umpires, refs etc. come in. I agree with you that the monitoring and the enforcement CANNOT be perfect, but this is one more instance where something will DEFINITELY be better than nothing. I think the way it should work is that players should be able to take up the issue with the umpires on the field and the match referee. If they luck out and the stuff gets caught on stump miks, then the officials can make a call on the issue themselves, without any need for anyone else intervening. Otherwise, there could be a hearing and then a judgment. The point is SOME kind of attempt should be made to at least limit these stuff. The recent RSA/Aus matches have been a joke in this regard. England and India have had their share of heated moments in the middle as well, but things never got out of hand and the series has been played in the best of spirits. To an extent, I guess the kind of captain you have matters as well. I suppose things were different with India and England back when Nasser and Sourav were in charge. But with Freddie and DRavid in charge now (both rather well behaved guys, Freddie only recently, RD all the time), that might have made a difference as well.

Well, the above thing is already in force to some degree. I know that when the West Indies toured Australia in 1997, things got really heated at times, and both Brian Lara and Shane Warne went to the match referee to complain about things that were said to them. I don't think bans were handed out, but I remember reading in Shane's bio that he had to go and speak to the umpiring panel or something about the incidents on the field, and Lara and Taylor had to do the same.

 

[honestbharani]

I'm afraid I disagree. It is certainly not all pioneered by Australia, or anything of the sort. The only reason people seek to blame Australia for sledging is because several Australian captains have been public about the fact that they believe sledging is an effective tactic to win games of cricket.

For example, Nasser Hussein was a sledger. Steve Waugh said in his book that Nasser was always talking, always commenting to the Australian players and trying to put them off. Hussein was the guy who called Graeme Smith "that guy" during a press conference, and called him "Bob" or something at the toss during a test. Certainly seems like a clear attempt to put him off his game, and the attitude of a sledger, doesn't it?

Hansie Cronje was also a sledger. Both of them were captains of opposing teams at the same time as Waugh, and yet Waugh has the reputation because he made the "mental disintegration" comments. The fact that he was honest about it doesn't make him any worse than anyone else. The West Indies sledged back in the 80s, and there's plenty of examples of even guys like Richards (who had a reputation for being pretty stoic) engaging in it, so who knows what the others said. Tony Greig had a reputation for it as well, I believe. So did Dennis Lillee and Ian Chappell, and Ian Botham and Javed Miandad... all guys who retired some time ago. The only difference is that now there are stump mics so people at home can hear all of it.

I am not saying it is all pioneered by Australia, but I have read so much that I think it is definitely probable that they were the ones to take it up in a big way. And I think Australia did start sledging as we know it today back in the 70s and since then, the other teams have picked it up as well. Cricket has always been rather competitive and I am sure there has been numerous instances of frayed tempers during many a match in the past, but I think the use of sledging as a tactic is definitely credited to Australia from what I have read and seen (mostly from very knowledgable folks) and since then, other teams have followed suit. I still think they MOSTLY pioneered modern sledging. The other teams may have introduced a few of the things within sledging but mostly, I do think it was Australia who started it.

 

[honestbharani]

Well, the above thing is already in force to some degree. I know that when the West Indies toured Australia in 1997, things got really heated at times, and both Brian Lara and Shane Warne went to the match referee to complain about things that were said to them. I don't think bans were handed out, but I remember reading in Shane's bio that he had to go and speak to the umpiring panel or something about the incidents on the field, and Lara and Taylor had to do the same.

I just think, if that is the case, the ICC must ban players on saying that so and so was a coward because he complained about sledging. Cullinan, I think, made that point a while back on TV, not exactly sure when. They already ban players from talking about umpiring and other controversial stuff, why not add THIS to that list? Somehow, people should discouraged from personally abusing and insulting the opposition players. Some sort of attempt should be made. The game will be better for it a few years down the line.