Caught in a bind over the sacking of Bucknor, Speed warned:
"We can't have one set of rules for the
That's exactly what we all desire. To quell more appeals and other brinkmanship, I suggest that Speed makes the whole process transparent.
What do you say?
There are many who feel sacking Bucknor has set an unhealthy precedent. There are others who say "Each time an Indian cricketer appeals, umpires are now compromised. Enrage the monster, and pay for it with your job. Quite the message of encouragement for a group already under immense pressure in their day-to-day duties."
However, in my opinion sacking Bucknor has set a good precedent. Any one who has played cricket lets say from W.G.Grace to the nondescript kid have smarted under the arbitrariness and bias in an umpire's decision.
This sacking will serve the purpose of letting all umpires know that incompetence, cussedness, arbitrariness and bias will not be tolerated.
Bucknor's sacking has made clear that umpires have to shape up or ship out. Isn't that a good precedent?
It has finally dawned on Ponting that some his teams antics need examination. A contrite Ponting says,
"We'll look at some of the footage, its perception and the way people see things when they're off the field. I might be talking to opposition players on the field but it might be construed by people watching on television that you're in a slanging or sledging match when that's not the case. I think it's important that we sit back and look at that footage. Look at our body language. See if there are areas that we can improve on."
Good idea Ponting, I suggest you to take a look at 'Pup's' body language as you declare Ganguly's catch clean.
Watch Clarke take an involuntarily step back and mumble inaudible words.
If you are half as good at reading body language as I am, you will realize that 'the future Captain' of
For if he was sure, he would have rushed forward and supported you vociferously.
"Cricket columnist Malcolm Conn, of The
Australian newspaper, said Ponting should be championed as a national hero for
exposing racism in cricket.
“Ponting deserves to be feted, not condemned,”
Conn wrote."
"'To me good umpires should officiate the match, even if it isHaving seen atrocious 'home umpiring' and how a couple of bad decisions can invoke cries of bias, I am for neutral umpires i.e., competent neutral umpires.
played by his home team, so that we have the best men in the centre. The
credibility factor should be taken into account while posting
umpires.'"
The appeal has given the illusion that
Foremost among them, is the suspicion that the ICC is a racist organisation. There is a long held view, that the sub-continental teams have coped stiffer punishment than other cricketing nations.
ICC's refusal to address it and exhibit transparency in its process and procedures has induced a feeling of persecution and given rise to the impression that we, the sub-continental teams, have to resort to brinkmanship for justice.
The Harbhajan episode is an excellent pointer. Indian fans find it unbelievable that Procter has chosen to ignore the words of the only person who was at the scene of the crime and side with a complainant on the basis of hearsay as the other witnesses were mere passer-by's.
The ICC and their adjudicator Procter may argue it is not so, they have legitimate reasons to ban Harbhajan. If it was so why don't they assuage our anger by making the process transparent?
Why have they gagged Procter? Let him explain, why would we complain if the answers are honest?
"Former Test umpire Dickie Bird believes controversial officialIf only he had listened, he would had his reputation and respect he had earned intact.
Steve Bucknor has now 'gone on too long' and should retire."
He also added that "When you get to that age... I have said to
Steve, 'Don't go on too long, get out while you are still respected'. I think he
has gone on too long."
What do you think of cricketer Harbhajan Singh's "monkey'' comment and should he have received a three-test ban? asked
Here is the result:
It is not a racist insult. (738 votes, 10.1%)
He should not have said it, but not been banned. (531 votes, 7.2%)
Aussies can dish it out, but can't take it. (4534 votes, 61.7%)
It's racist and the ban was right. (253 votes, 3.4%)
It was wrong but should have stayed on the field. (580 votes, 7.9%)
Any racist insult should cop a severe penalty. (263 votes, 3.6%)
Sledging is part of cricket, especially in tests. (444 votes, 6.0%)
Here is the disclaimer: Stuff polls are not scientific and reflect the opinions of only those internet users who have chosen to participate
BTW, I voted any racist insult should cop a severe penalty. How would you vote?
Waffling by Adam Gilchrist.
Adam has clarified that if he is not fully sure, he does appeal, and yesterday he claims that he was not sure about whether or not Rahul had nicked it.
Unfortunately, it adds fuel to fire.
Unsurprisingly
Amazingly Ponting was also personally unpopular, with 82 per cent of over 1600 people saying he was not a "good ambassador for the game of cricket".
So while the popularity of cricket is not down - with Channel 9 securing an "Ashes-like" peak of 2.6million viewers on Sunday - it appears the hard-line tactics of Ponting's
Talkback airwaves across the country also heard opposition to a win-at-all-costs mentality.
When it comes to sports we are all alike. We like hard charging sportsmen and not sportsmen who push the envelope when it comes to gamesmanship.
New evidence has emerged that Symonds is rather slow on the up take.
Reading an article on relationship breakdowns in a women's magazine, Symonds exclaimed to his colleagues: "What a stupid question: 'When was the last time you had a row with your partner?"' After his team-mates picked themselves up from the floor, it was explained to Symonds that the question referred to an argument, not the boating activity.
In light of this evidence we urge the ICC to revaluate Symonds interpretation of 'racial' abuse. J
How do we make the Australian cricketers understand what we mean when we say 'The Aussies don't play the game in the right spirit?'
Undoubtedly, the win at all cost attitude has made
The press conference at the end of the Sydney Test, was a classic example of their incomprehensibility. When asked a persistent question about a catch; Ponting in turn asked 'are you questioning my integrity?'
Actually, his question sums it up. Being an insular sporting nation,
Someone somewhere has to sit down with the Australian players and make them understand that the onus is on
Here are the results at the time of writing. (The poll is open).
Herald Sun
• Close
Poll Results
Thanks for voting, here are the results so far:
Did
Yes
78% (1069 votes)
No
21% (286 votes)
Total votes
Total of 1355 votes
(BTW, you will have to vote to see the result.)
As my access is minimal Iam unable to give you the break up of the voters.
However, since it is an Australian newspaper I assume the majority of the voters are Australians and taking it to its logical conclusion I conclude most Australians feel the umpires gave
Speed defends Bucknor, Benson:
"It's a difficult job made more difficult by technology and improvements in technology. I think we have the best umpires available.
It is as clear as day that the technology was not the problem; it is the umpire's ill-judgments which are the cause for concern. Moreover going by Bucknor's recent record it is high time ICC put him to pasture. Benson came across as inexperienced and naïve. One other thing which stood out was the reluctance exhibited by both the umpires to refer quiet a few doubtful decisions to the third umpire. Is it their ego which stopped them?
All said and done Speed's statement is only going to enrage an already irate cricket follower. What do you say?
Symonds didn't like the pat on the arse.
AUSSIE superstar Andrew Symonds will argue that he was just standing up for a mate at tonight's Cricket Council Code of Conduct hearing into his fiery exchange with
Where did 'monkey' come from?
Things are hotting up in the 'racial abuse' case involving Harbhajan Singh and Andrew Symonds.
….the ICC roped in reputed British lawyer Nigel Peters to advice match referee Mike Procter during the disciplinary hearing against the Indian off-spinner on Sunday.
The BCCI should tread carefully. This case could be blow up in their face.
This could be the most telling of all comments on the latest Harbhajan Singh/ Andrew Symonds episode.
Former Australian captain Mark Taylor feared Ponting had opened up a can of worms and potential tit for tat citings by rival captains over on-field behaviour.
"I think Ricky has opened up Pandora's Box in terms of this,"
"The Australians play tough cricket and make the odd chirp, if this goes any further I am sure there will be other times when Ricky Ponting will be on the other side of the ledger when the Australian team make the chirp."
So no is above slipping in a racial comment, isn't it.
Dinnie has asked me reveal my darkest secrets. So here goes:
Whew! That's a load off my chest. J
A bowler describes his plight.
"The Newlands boundary looked increasingly small as I approached to start the sixth over – the rest I guess is an over to forget," James Kirtley describes his only over against an in-form Adam Gilchrist and Matthew Hayden in the Twenty20 cricket World Cup.
BTW, do you know any new cricketing related quotes?
That's what Channel 9 says:
Steve Crawley, an executive sports producer with the network, said some of the innovations could not be entirely relied upon.
"I'd hate us to be involved in the judicial system of cricket,"
Umm... technology cannot help…. So how can we eliminate umpiring errors?
It is easy to blame umpires and advocate use of technology as an antidote. However, are umpires the only culprits? How about the lack of sportsmanship and the lost refrain 'it is a gentleman's game'?
When cricket was a gentleman's game, umpiring was a simpler task. The bowler and fielders appealed when they genuinely thought the batsman was out, and the batsman didn't wait for the umpire's decision when he knew he was out. Trust was built into the conduct of the game. The umpire could trust players' reactions and take a decision accordingly.
Let us first inculcate the spirit of sportsmanship in our cricketers.Let it seep into our future cricketing generations and then if found wanting let us go the whole hog and let replays decide
Let us not be absurd and ask
…. should the umpires be penalised for every error they commit for you never know how decisive it could prove?
Since most umpires are well-versed with the cricketing laws, the solution is to have more number of physically fit umpires.
Additionally, we should lessen the technological intervention. It has given rise to more controversies; expansive dramas, hysterical dissent and have successfully reduced umpires to mere ciphers.
Let us stop second guessing the umpire and go back to the days when we unquestioningly accepted his decision.
There are unfounded rumours that
Eh! Unbelievable! But we should also put competitive scores on the board.
I am with Brad Hogg:
Brad Hogg said the human element added to the drama of the game.
"I just think you have to keep the human element in there," he said.
"It is just fantastic when you are … sitting back and enjoying the Boxing Day Test match in your lounge room you have bit more to talk about with that human element and it creates a different feel."
Don't you think cricket would become straitlaced, stiff and lose its charm?
BCCI has directed the Indian team management to lodge a protest with ICC Match Referee Mike Procter against atrocious umpiring decisions made on the opening day of the second Test against
I honestly don't know what good will come off it. Let us await the ICC's and the CAB's response.
What a man!
Andrew Symonds has admitted he should have been given out long before reaching his century against
Coming from a long list of sportsmen who claim bump catches and what not it is heartening to see Symond's sporting side.
Fair go! Gentlemen!
For the umpteenth time the Australian's stage a remarkable recovery.
Symonds may be lucky to still be there after a confident appeal for a caught-behind decision off Indian paceman Ishant Sharma was turned down by umpire Steve Bucknor.
Wish someone calculates the number of times umpires have helped
Meanwhile,
"New Zealand Cricket has threatened to exclude players who join the breakaway Indian Cricket League."
This puts them in a situation of finding quality players to play in the national team.
As Tim May, chief executive of FICA, the international players' association, points out, " So what are we going to do, have a
Uh! Uh! I doubt whether they can field a 'second XI', or maybe yes, if they include half a dozen sheep in the team.
For all their purported hatred for the 'Poms', the Aussies and the English have a 'mutual admiration society' going.
Suppose the England team beats Bangladesh, immediately their media will start talking about how this team could be basis of their next Ashes challenge indicating that 'The Ashes' is the only series they are concerned.
Unfortunately, this affliction seems to have spread to
Which begs the question, do you consider 'The Ashes' to be, in terms of quality and competition, the best Test match series?
Steve Waugh suggests that Sehwag should open with Dravid and justifies it by adding that Sehwag stroke play will take the pressure off Dravid to score.
Is this worthy of considering, I would say not, for firstly, I think Dravid is a misfit as an opener and secondly Jaffer is no slouch if he gets his eye in.
This idea deserves thumbs down.
The BBC has carried out an interesting exercise.
I plead ignorance about our domestic cricket.
So I pass the ball on to you, who do you think will be the cricketers to watch in 2008?
If newspaper reports are to be believed, the Indian team management is unhappy with Yuvraj's attitude. Now what that means is open to conjecture and leaves a lot to our imagination.
This is atypical of what goes on in Indian cricket. Malign a player in public with rumours and innuendos and then drop him from the team. During our last tour to
If you are worried about a players attitude the sane thing is to talk to him one on one and then if necessary explain to the press the reasons for your actions. Here it is the other way around. They are yet to talk to Yuvraj but his attitude has already been discussed threadbare in public.
One had hoped that Kumble was above 'character assassinations'.
This post is dedicated to Pan who actually set it off and to Scorpi (that's what I call him) who feels I am (we) unfair to Dravid.
Now to the interesting question, who or what should be our combination for the next Test. Obviously more capable minds are grappling with it, but here is my sixpence worth.
There is a general consensus that Dravid has failed as an opener. Similarly, Yuvraj has also been consigned to the dust bin of Test history.
However I am not in line with that thinking and as an antidote I suggest these measures.
Bring DK or let Dravid continue partnering Jaffer.
If it is DK kick out Dhoni. (Simple reason we don't need 2 keepers). Bring Irfan in for bolstering both our batting and bowling.
To make a really aggressive intent, this would be my eleven,
Jaffer
DK
Dravid
Laxman
Tendulkar
Ganguly
Yuvraj (He needs to be nursed)
Irfan/Ishant (I haven't seen Pankaj bowling)
Kumble
Harbhajan
Zaheer
R.P.Singh
If you are wondering why I am intent on bolstering the bowling, a dispassionate analysis will show that when we bat second our batsmen invariably chase totals in excess of 300. (There are exceptions.)
I declare the season open. J
Ian Botham thinks so:
Sports psychology, what's that all about? It's the biggest con of all time, people making a lot of money talking bullshit. In
Botham has always projected himself as an 'earthy' cricketer and his assessment seems simplistic, in line with the image he projects.
Personally, I consider all 'team psychology' to be simplistic and corny. Nevertheless, I believe, sports psychology can help individuals.
"Cricket Australia spokesman Peter Young said
no action could be taken against those involved in the chant because it was not
reported to police or security despite them being within metres of those
responsible.
'Police have confirmed the chant took place and conducted
extensive interviews with both Indian and Australian supporters and they did not
find anyone who was offended,' Mr Young said."
South Africa crashed to 122 for five at close
of play in reply to a West Indian total of 408 in which Chanderpaul made a
patient century.
There was no need to comment on Dravid's reluctance in public.If his intentions were honourable then he should have brought this to Kumble's attention in private.'I think it was something that he wouldn't have
been too happy about. It's something he would have taken on reluctantly.
There have been quite a few 'better'I rest my case.
performances than Dravid's stonewalling. New Zealand's Geoff Allott once
batted for 101 minutes and still failed to open his account. But most of such
performances came from lower order batsmen who had no or very little batting
abilities or were batting under tremendous pressure. So, they can't really be
blamed for their slow scoring.
Dravid's performance is the fourth worst
performance in entire Test history if we take into consideration the
performances of the specialist batsmen only."
"Hogg made a prediction in his column in the
Truth newspaper. 'I got the calculator out, multiplied a hundred by five and
came up with 500, and wrote an article saying Shane Warne would take 500
wickets.' He was sacked. 'I got the sack from Truth newspaper because they
reckoned I was writing a load of crap — the paper was full of crap! Maybe they
knew I was about 200 wickets short.'"
"Indian team wants Munaf to be available for
selection for the third Test in Perth, starting on January
16-20."
"Captain Ricky Ponting said Australia wanted
more time to assess the MCG wicket before deciding on the final
side".
