Andre Nel and sledging

[Ikki]

Firstly, as i said, threatening murder is legit in certain nations. Just because it isnt in your nation doesnt automatically make it right or wrong.
Secondly, yes, my viewpoints represent the majority of cricket fans, since the majority of cricket fans are subcontinental and in subcontinental culture, random swearing is NOT on.

I used to go to school in Dubai called "Grammar School". In this school the majority (90%) of kids were from the subcontinent. They swore more than any other people I've ever met. I'm not labelling people, because my ethnicity is close to theirs, but you're painting a very distorted image of yourself. I learned enough curses in that school to last me a lifetime. My family is also friends with many Indian and Pakistani families. Since growing up, I could not tell you one adult member not using curses to joke. I don't know...I reckon they were great people, and just because they swore occaisionally didn't stain them in my eyes. Your description however...is a bit naive.

Also, to think you represent them all...LOL...do they know about this?

Indeed. Let them play. Not yap away obscenities.

I'm sure they'd rather play with no crowd, than have someone like you watching them.

Oh yes they are allowed to utter crude and obscene language in a hostile way. Not the joking way between mates.

Do you have mates? Because among mates, it's probably more common to use obscene language to jest. You take banter with the occaisional swearing and pin at as hostile. You're going to vilify anyone/everyone with that outlook.

Their job is menial. The stage isnt.

Again, this doesn't make sense. You're putting them on a pedastool. You may as well watch your local high-schol janitor clean up rubbish on T.V. then time him on how fast he is.

 

[C_C]

People do sports not to entertain other people. We entertain ourselves. Whether we're physically or mentally stimulated, it's the self that is important. Cricket is a bunch of men in a field playing the sport. We, as the public, love seeing the best of these players go at it. Thus institutions are set around these talents in helping us watch and admire them, while giving them a comfortable living. With us or not, they're still the same men playing on a cricketing field.

That might be true but we the public, who are paying money to see the game most definately have a right to comment on the nature of sports. From a societerial perspective, there is nothing wrong in doing sports but there is nothing wrong in sitting around like a bum all day either. The fundamental contribution of sports to the society is entertainment. And as such, they are entertainers and we the public definately can have an opinion on the nature of sports.

My family is also friends with many Indian and Pakistani families. Since growing up, I could not tell you one adult member not using curses to joke. I don't know...I reckon they were great people, and just because they swore occaisionally didn't stain them in my eyes. Your description however...is a bit naive.

The important thing to realise, culturally, is that while swearing amongst kids is common in the subcontinent ( i still retain an assortment of hindi curse words despite not speaking hindi for years) in the adult circles, swearing is seen as extremely offensive unless directed specifically in a joking fashion. I am sure this is not true for every subcontinental person or families but that is the general culture there.
As such, it is extremely offensive to be cursing and i find that it is extremely crude and barbaric to see cricket come down to swearing all the time.
I feel that when you are on national television, especially when you are representing your nation,you have an obligation to observe minimum decency standards.
For example, people like Tendulkar- who almost never swear on field offensively.

I'm sure they'd rather play with no crowd, than have someone like you watching them.

Perhaps. But if they wanna represent a nation, they better shut up or else play cricket at a level gathering lower media exposure.

Do you have mates? Because among mates, it's probably more common to use obscene language to jest. You take banter with the occaisional swearing and pin at as hostile. You're going to vilify anyone/everyone with that outlook.

It is extremely crude to speak in third person derogatively in the presence of that person. And besides, i highly doubt that Smith and Warney are best of mates. I fail to see how getting abusive language hurled at me by a person i dont know outside of business circles is 'okay and should be encouraged' ( and that is what the bulk of sledging today is- and it should be sanctioned.)

Again, this doesn't make sense. You're putting them on a pedastool. You may as well watch your local high-schol janitor clean up rubbish on T.V. then time him on how fast he is.

Whoosh !

 

[vic_orthdox]

...but without us (the public) watching them, they wouldn't be doing it in the first place.

So that's the only reason Paul Smith is playing in the 2nd XI at Warracknabeal? For the crowd's entertainment?

 

[C_C]

So that's the only reason Paul Smith is playing in the 2nd XI at Warracknabeal? For the crowd's entertainment?

Certainly not, but you cant deny that popularity of the sports and the perks associated with it are one of the major attractions to the sport and a leading motivation for many sportsmen.
Ie, if sports was reduced to your standard 40K a year job, quite a few wouldnt be in the game.

 

[vic_orthdox]

Certainly not, but you cant deny that popularity of the sports and the perks associated with it are one of the major attractions to the sport and a leading motivation for many sportsmen.
Ie, if sports was reduced to your standard 40K a year job, quite a few wouldnt be in the game.

I'd say quite a few of the older players wouldn't be in the game, but generally most would still be playing it. Cricket isn't a desk job, if people didn't enjoy it then they wouldn't have taken it up in the first place.

 

[Dasa]

So that's the only reason Paul Smith is playing in the 2nd XI at Warracknabeal? For the crowd's entertainment?

I meant professional/international cricket. Clearly if the public didn't watch cricket and didn't contribute to the game financially, it'd die out. So ultimately, professional cricket is all about entertaining those who keep the game alive.

 

[benchmark00]

I meant professional/international cricket. Clearly if the public didn't watch cricket and didn't contribute to the game financially, it'd die out. So ultimately, professional cricket is all about entertaining those who keep the game alive.

Crowds don't go to see competitive croquet, but a professional league still exists.

 

[Dasa]

Crowds don't go to see competitive croquet, but a professional league still exists.

I'm sure there are enough people watching competitive croquet to keep it viable.

 

[benchmark00]

Certainly not, but you cant deny that popularity of the sports and the perks associated with it are one of the major attractions to the sport and a leading motivation for many sportsmen.
Ie, if sports was reduced to your standard 40K a year job, quite a few wouldnt be in the game.

Cricket hasnt always been a full time job though.

Lawry was a plumber (IIRC) whilst paying cricket for Australia.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

Certainly not, but you cant deny that popularity of the sports and the perks associated with it are one of the major attractions to the sport and a leading motivation for many sportsmen.
Ie, if sports was reduced to your standard 40K a year job, quite a few wouldnt be in the game.

Until WSC, cricket pretty much was your standard 40K a year job, give or take.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Look mate, thats utter codswallop.
There are minimum decency standards to be followed on public television. If not, its about time cricket got a tougher censorship rating. It is disingenious to attribute and twist my statement to 'tv is bad for kids' simply because i am not arguing about tv- i am arguing about non fictional public performances. Obviously parents have a job to do but that does NOT negate the fact that public figures have a responsibility not to act like douchebags in midst of their performance.

When you are on the public spotlight, you have to behave. Period. If you cannot, you shouldnt BE on public spotlight. That comes with the job. I wouldnt say someone like Tendulkar is 'perfect' but his attitude is the one i want to promote. Not the Andre Nel type hooliganism.

Which is why I said if the payers overstep the mark let them be dealt with accordingly.

I simply don't believe your concerns lie as stated.

My point about TV was if we're going to jump up and down every time someone sees something they don't like then we might as well get rid of it. There's some rather unusual people out there who seemingly sit in front of it waiting to be offended so they can contact the station and complain.

I think there's more to worry about than what's happening on the cricket field, you might find an incident that warrants punishment once or twice maximum in any given game, and that's extremely rare.

If kids see a player blowing up and doing something stupid, and then sees them punished, I don't think we have too much to worry about.

Oh, and it's not codswallop or disingenious, I'm not offended by you using these terms though I've seen you at work before.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Hardly most people....as C_C said, the vast majority of people in the subcontinent regard sledging as unacceptable.
Anyway, even if it's harmless most people would still find it unpleasant, especially if subjected to it.

A group of people from one area hardly represents a majority, no matter which way you look at it.

 

[benchmark00]

A group of people from one area hardly represents a majority, no matter which way you look at it.

Do you, or did you, write for The Bladder?

 

[Son Of Coco]

Look, there is a reason why great sportsmen are referred to as "heroes" and "idols"... It is that simple. Why do you think Sehwag plays in a similar manner to Sachin, atleast with his drives and helmets? Why do you think Brooke Walker had the same action and approach to the crease as Shane Warne? Kids who watch cricket are at an impressionable age and my point is the blokes who indulge in personal abuse and insults on the cricket field are sending signals that it is OK in cricket, when it clearly isn't and shouldn't be.

You said they SHOULD know it is wrong, but how will they know it is wrong when they see their favourite players do it on the field almost all the time and NOT get punished for it?

Because personal abuse and insults don't happen on the field 'almost all the time', and when it does become abusive and personal players generally get punished perhaps?

I think it's quite obvious that the difference here is in cultures. It seems that in the subcontinent 'heroes' and 'idols' are taken a lot more seriously than in other places, which is why there's such a difference of opinion.

At some point during the argument for no sledging at all I'm pretty sure someone mentioned the fact that other cultures have to be taken into account...and this is correct. Getting rid of it altogether doesn't do this however. There's been a crackdown in whats said on a field (the first of which was way back around 93/94) and personal abuse isn't tolerated. There's a rule that I assume attempts to cater to everyone as to what's allowable and what isn't. Every individual has their won interpretation of this and un fortunately for most on here there will never be a rule that suits each individual's desires. That's the way it is. I'm mostly happy with how it's going at the moment. The latest example - Nel- fronted the match committee. Others have too. That's it really as far as I'm concerned.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Do you, or did you, write for The Bladder?

I wrote a couple of things on there a while back in the 'Reader's Entries' section (it's not actually called that, but whatever the equivalent is).

 

[Son Of Coco]

Ummm. I do. I am not fond of nasty ( except maybe certain bedroom variations ).




I am sorry but i do not see it as a part of competetive sport. No sport should be allowed to progress to such levels of competetiveness that people forget the central objective : that their records mean nothing. They only exist to entertain the masses.
It doesnt kill them to be courteous. Infact, i demand that as a job pre-requisite.



Maybe someone should teach Hussey that perhaps the best answer is to shut their collective yaps on the pitch or say things that are passable without an R or X rating ?
I still dont get it - why are you defending nastyness ?

I'm sorry, but that's not true. Unless it's somewhere along the lines of the tree falling in the forest and noone being there to see it. If competitive sport occurs and noone watches it, has it actually happened? Entertainment is one function of competitive sport at a high level, but it's not the only function.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Awesome reasoning!



I speak from the overwhelming majority of cricket supporters on this planet. So infact, its your rationale that is beyond common.



bulldust. Utter complete baloney. before the stump-mics, the spectators could hardly hear a word and cricket was still very entertaining.
And i dont care much for uncouth behaviour being passed off as entertainment.
If you want that, i suggest watching WWE.



They certainly should not be allowed to get away with abusive language and unecessary hostility.



No it isnt. None of the swearing i've ever heard in cricket was said in even the remotest lighthearted fashion.



because they are on tv and international news for non-fictional roles. I expect gentlemanly behaviour in public eye. Below that is uncouth.

hahaha, hang on I'll just check. I have the overwhelming majority of cricket supporters numbers in my phone book.

As I said above, this is cultural and that's fine. Your point of view isn't 'the happy medium' that will appease all spectators though.

 

[Son Of Coco]

I am willing to bet, your girlfriend is not exactly in Barishnikov class and neither is she in the public eye. Without entertainment factor,sports is nothing more than childsplay really.

Competitive sport exists with or without a crowd, competitiveness is not defined by the number of people that turn up. Professional sport on the other hand is generally expected to draw some form of following from the general public...I'm not sure you're qualified to comment on what it means to individual players though. It's a hell of a lot of work to put in to simply be classed as 'entertainment'. I think you'd find that without individual goals to achieve and milestones to pass most people would simply fade out of the game due to their own lack of interest. This happens in competitive sport from amateur level right through to the pros. As soon as a sportsman sees him or herself as merely entertainment I'd suspect their days are numbered.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Phew!

Looks like I'm the only one here. I'll take a breath before answering my own posts.

 

[Son Of Coco]

Which is why I said if the payers overstep the mark let them be dealt with accordingly.

I simply don't believe your concerns lie as stated.

My point about TV was if we're going to jump up and down every time someone sees something they don't like then we might as well get rid of it. There's some rather unusual people out there who seemingly sit in front of it waiting to be offended so they can contact the station and complain.

I think there's more to worry about than what's happening on the cricket field, you might find an incident that warrants punishment once or twice maximum in any given game, and that's extremely rare.

If kids see a player blowing up and doing something stupid, and then sees them punished, I don't think we have too much to worry about.

Oh, and it's not codswallop or disingenious, I'm not offended by you using these terms though I've seen you at work before.

Nice one...clown!