AWTA - you can have a problem with grog, in how it affects your behaviour, and not be an alcoholic.Not sure of the exact terminology but if it takes over your professional life then it is a problem.
As Geoff Boycott said: Fletcher took the moral high ground by claiming 'nasty' details should not be uncovered in the media.Why are people so intent on criticising Duncan Fletcher? Quite pathetic really.
It's because he's brought out a new book and slated a load of cricket people including his own captain.Why are people so intent on criticising Duncan Fletcher? Quite pathetic really.
And? Isn't that what sports books are usually for? Better to be honest IMO.It's because he's brought out a new book and slated a load of cricket people including his own captain.
But then it's not "pathetic" if those insulted want to hit back. In fact it'll probably help sell the book more.And? Isn't that what sports books are usually for? Better to be honest IMO.
I don't have any problem with Flintoff trying to defend himself. I've no idea how he could possibly do it, because the antics he got up to are inexcuseable in my books, but he can still try. I just think it's pathetic how people are criticising Fletcher for revealing the truths, but I get the feeling if the player involved was less loved and not as important to England, then people would be sharpening the knives.But then it's not "pathetic" if those insulted want to hit back. In fact it'll probably help sell the book more.
I don't have any problem with Flintoff trying to defend himself. I've no idea how he could possibly do it, because the antics he got up to are inexcuseable in my books, but he can still try. I just think it's pathetic how people are criticising Fletcher for revealing the truths, but I get the feeling if the player involved was less loved and not as important to England, then people would be sharpening the knives.
I wouldn't be overly interested in what Flintoff says anyway. As I said previously, being drunk at a practice isn't acceptable, especially for the team captain. I can see where Boycott is coming from, but he usually has a fair few negative things to say about everything.Freddie hasn't replied yet, it'll be interesting to see what he has to say at some time. It's Boycott and Botham who have hit back.
Equally, who the blazes is to say he is unless they know one hell of a lot more than anyone on here is likely to know?We had this argument at the time about Flintoff's drinking... I think you'll find that the medical definition of a drinking problem and indeed alcoholism is not as lenient as people who think Flintoff's a good lad. And who's to say that Flintoff isn't addicted to alcohol?
It's a shame, really - Boycott is pretty much right in what he says about the media. It's not there to be nice. Well, I'd like it TBH if it was. I'd like it if the media and those in the cricket team worked together to the maximum extent possible.
I'd also like it if the media and the govermnent worked to the maximum extent possible.Richard said:I'd like it if the media and those in the cricket team worked together to the maximum extent possible.
I'd say that the counter-argument towards that is that the accusation towards Fletcher, from what I can see, is not that he was prickly towards a certain journalist or two, but that he was prickly throughout whole news conferences on regular occassions. You're representing the mood of the team in front of those press conferences, you need to show - not just to the press, but far more importantly to the consumers of the media - that there's a positivity flowing through the group. Fletcher didn't convey that.Richard said:As it is, I don't see how you can expect someone like Duncan Fletcher to accept the media for being what they are then just forgive them everything, and be open and warm to them. If someone's a &%$£ to you, frankly, you've got no obligation to do anything but return the favour.
ATTN: everybody. Democracy just spontaneously combusted.Yeah, that too.
??Not everyone is Frank Packer and Rupert Murdoch y'know.
What some might interpret as "prickly" I'd merely interpret as "noncommittal". He tried to remain as neutral as possible; he knew the media had the potential for huge backstabbing, interpreting things in their own way totally different to how they're meant, and many other things. So he tried to minimise that.I'd say that the counter-argument towards that is that the accusation towards Fletcher, from what I can see, is not that he was prickly towards a certain journalist or two, but that he was prickly throughout whole news conferences on regular occassions. You're representing the mood of the team in front of those press conferences, you need to show - not just to the press, but far more importantly to the consumers of the media - that there's a positivity flowing through the group. Fletcher didn't convey that.