RE:Ban ICC
by devdass on Jan 08, 2008 12:18 PM Permalink
And make the team which can't hold out 65 overs because of 2 bad umpiring decisions winner of all matches?
RE:Ban ICC
by neil varghese on Jan 08, 2008 12:30 PM Permalink
Not 2 buddy %u2026 3 %u2026%u2026. No team can save a test match if a toporder batmans is out 2 times before he makes 165 when the total read 134/6
1.the biggest point is if you let it happen . you will be accepting that you are "racist". 2. aussie has planned it very much in advance and they have thought of every move. 3. so at least now watever you do pls plan it completely. 4. go into full investigation since it smells of complete planned fixing of aussie umpires and ICC. it could be few people from bcci are involved. but it cant happen without fully planned.
Dont you think that after coming to know about all that has transpired in Sydney, it appears that Ponting and his men has conspired to try and make a Monkey out of us ?
Lets talk credibility. How many Australians have been suspended for match fixing? None. Indians? Where did the entire match fixing episode originate? India. How many current Australians have been charged with ball tampering? None. Indians? Which countries biased umpires first led to the use of neutral umpires? Indias. Which country has refused to abide with the match referees decision before (in SA)? India. How many Australian cricket administrators have been charged with corruption? None. Need I go on. I'm the first to agree that asking a player for his opinion on a wicket is fraught with trouble and that Punters credibility is a bit on the nose, however we view Simmo as above reproach. If he said Harbi said it, he said it. End of story. Before you start making comments about other peoples houses, perhaps you should ensure that your own is in order first.
RE:Credibility?
by mahesh waran on Jan 08, 2008 02:27 PM Permalink
Mr .Doggy , yes some indian players were accused of match fixing and they were rightly removed from playing any cricket further, justice saved at the cost of many indian players at the same time some other SA players who also involved are still playing in international cricket.2) Match fixing not started in India it has been there for so many years, ever heard of some fixing happened in Sharjah , ,For Aussies credit you can tell this thing but it doesnt mean that they are genuine 3) Hey do you have some memor problem with the umpires or dont you read the papres of countries touring Aussie, Aussie have a very good reputaion of playing with 31 umpires for 8 decades, dont try to hide behind your Garbage umpiring standards . None of the indian umpires are in International panel we accept that we have poor umpires but they are poor umpires but not biased umpires .4) why the hell are you talking about corrupted administrators when we are checking with onfield behaviour of players. Which country has the greates reputation of Sledging, which country has the reputation of talking about some one's sister when you are on field, which country has the reputation talking about opponent's mom when he is there ,which country justifies sledging is a part of the game and cries when the opponent sledges, which country make foul allegation on bowlers when they cannot face him,which captain grounds the ball on final day and appeal for wicket, answer for above questions,Mighty crying Aussie.
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 02:37 PM Permalink
Ok (and its Doogie, not Doggy - don't you racially vilify me.) 1) Some SA players with dodgy pasts are playing. Doesn't change the fact that match fixing came from bookies - Indian bookies. 2) Sharjah is a place so I have heard of it, I refer you to point 1. 3) Simon Taufel is considered the worlds best umpire (an aussie). I used to bowl, so I consider all umpires are garbage. We didn't appoint the ump's and they weren't aussies so whats your point? 4) Administration is responsible for players conduct. Sledging is fine, its legal. I don't agree with some of the stuff the Oz team gets up to but how can you say anything after what Sreesanth gets up to? Last tour of India your captain had to withdraw an appeal because it was unsporting. Enough said. As for the rest of your emotional outburst, read my other posts, I think I've covered them all. I'm not really crying, we did win after all :)
RE:Credibility?
by on Jan 08, 2008 05:01 PM Permalink
Doogie you are welcome on this forum. You have a right to be here just like everyone else. It's sad tho buddy to see you desperately trying to support a team whch has no honour or grace. Indians aren't blameless but Oz invented the sledging and took it to new heights now can't seem to take their own medecine. Andy Symonds may be an honourable man but his word against Tendulkars??? C'mon you will never see Sachin remain at the crease if he knew he was out...he has too much pride in his own ability.
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 05:26 PM Permalink
Thank you "". I never suggested the Aussies had honour or grace. Not quite sure where that comes into cricket anymore with the ubersalaries everyone gets. Everyone says Ian Chappell invented sledging however you may find interesting some of the reputed quotes of Dr. W.G. Grace which I think you'll see are up there with anything that is said today. Last time I looked, Dr Grace was an Englishman. As to whether Sachin or Simmo is lying and whose telling the truth, I cannot tell you. Simmo in our view is beyond reproach and Tendulkar in yours is also. We view Sachin with the highest regard (as is deserved) and cannot understand why Simmo is not viewed elsewhere with the same regard. As for Sachin staying at the crease, I could say the same about Gilchrist but that doesn't move this conversation along any further. Whether someone walks and whether someone was racially vilified are in my view not really comparable.
RE:Credibility?
by George Wenzel on Jan 08, 2008 12:49 PM Permalink
Check into your country's history amd then remind us of ours'. Besides, how does all this make Harbhajan "guilty" of what he has not said. Why should we take Symonds' word ? Wasn't he the player who stood his ground when he knew for sure that he was out. How can a you take the word of a person who had cheated in the same match. Has he reformed overnight? our house may not be in order but that does not give you or for that matter anyone else to wrong us. If you are talking of credibility then, don't you think that Ponting needs to be banned, like Rashid Latif of Pakistan, for falsely claiming a catch that wasn't clean or would you like to sweep it under the carpet. would now go on to justifry that what Latif did was cheating and what Ponting did was in the interest of the team ? Cricket as we understand is batting, bowling and fielding. Now, Ponting and his men have added a new dimension, they have included cheating, too.
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 01:40 PM Permalink
Do we have a history? Thanks George for instructing me on that, you learn something new every day. You and Why Care should open a school. Since you have conveniently forgotten, how many Indians walked in the last match? One, Yuvraj. Very few cricketers walk and usually they do because it was a blatant nick. Apply the rest of the world with the same yardstick as the Aussies and you may as well give up cricket. Everyone cheats.
RE:Credibility?
by Hind on Jan 08, 2008 12:36 PM Permalink
That is the point. Why always these things go only with punishing of Sub Continent people. Removing mud is ball tampering common many Aussies would have to sit out. 1. Who sledge : Aussies. By the way sleding is not part of cricket or anyother game, its plain abusing others what ever you call 2.Who is fairst racist punished : Aussie, infact proper rules were implemented,half the old and new team would have banned, includein McGrath, Warne, Steve wagh , gilli,pointing, hyden many of the times they were left even thought they are cought.
Drug Abuse : Assiue, remember warne
Livid behaviour during a series : again warne , and dirty sms in england
There are many such cases, but racist administrator give lenient hearing to Aussies and penalize heAvyly the subcontinent teams.
Agreed the ban on Bajji should stay , them why not pointing be banned for same behaviour for which Pakistani ex-player Rashid was banned, 5 test matches for improper behaviour by captain. Why is he not even pulled atleast by the racist match referee. Rahid was pusnished by same match refre.
RE:RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 12:40 PM Permalink
Haven't seen the Rashid catch so I can't compare. If Ricky is dishonest about claiming catches and has a win at all costs attitude, then why not claim the disputed catch in the first innings? Conveniently forgotten in all the hype.
RE:RE:RE:Credibility?
by George Wenzel on Jan 08, 2008 01:17 PM Permalink
No need to see Rashid's catch. forget it. at least What have got to say about Pontings Catch
RE:Credibility?
by Why Care on Jan 08, 2008 12:21 PM Permalink
Doogie- You're absolutely pathetic in both your arguments and knowledge. The neutral umpire issue started with biased umpiring by the Pakistanis, and it was in fact a suggestion proposed by a Pakistani himself- Imran Khan.
You are as pathetic in your arguments as your beloved Punter himself. You keep coming up with specious arguments to defend and justify the Oz teams dishonesty, when the truth is out there for the world to see.
Honestly, do some soul searching, and if you are not happy about whining by a billion indians, like you were complaining this morning, then simply leave this forum- we didn't invite you in to become a part of it.
And go and try to understand the meaning of the term Orwellian- cuz that's what defines the Oz behavior and response (including your own) to this ugly hell of mess created by your man of no integrity!
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 12:27 PM Permalink
Played any cricket yet? I know tours to India in the 70's and 80's here were considered very painful due to poor umpiring. Your right, Imran did endorse it but it was only after years of suggestions from England. FYI, Tony Greig first suggested it. I have heard of George Orwell and I guess if you have to relate a fictional interpretation to reality, well thats fine too. I guess thats why there are so many Indians complaining because they just don't like the real world.
RE:Credibility?
by Why Care on Jan 08, 2008 12:38 PM Permalink
Everyone has seen what has happened in reality and in the real world. It's only you Oz-s that stubbornly intend to look away from the truth, deny it, and then claim that nothing wrong happened. So maybe you guys need to look around yourself to see if you ARE indeed in the real world. And considered poor in OZland doesn't mean they were indeed poor. Fix your own house before pointing fingers at others- the underarm bowling episode, one of the most shameful in the history of cricket, says a lot abt Oz claim to playing fair and square.
And is that all you can say 'played any cricket yet'? Can't rebut with reasoning and proper arguments so keep repeating yourself?
And the term Orwellian is not of any fictional coinage- it applies to real world situations. Go, do some reading. Passed high school yet?
RE:RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 12:48 PM Permalink
Yep, Underarm was poor, and you guys hired him as a coach. Your the one claiming to have played more cricket than me. I'm just trying to see some proof. Nope, never passed high school. Didn't need it to start Uni. Orwellian refers to 1984, a fictional novel I do believe. Really though, nothing went on in that game that hasn't happened 100 times over except Ponting claiming the Clarke catch and that was a direct result of a match condition your captain agreed to. I have the greatest respect for Mr. Kumble as a cricketer and a person but in that instance he made a very big mistake. Not because Punter cannot be trusted but that players should not be in a position to make decisions concerning dismissals. Ever.
RE:RE:RE:Credibility?
by George Wenzel on Jan 08, 2008 01:03 PM Permalink
Has Doogie nothing to say about ICC's action to be taken on Ponting's unclean catch.
RE:Credibility?
by Why Care on Jan 08, 2008 01:23 PM Permalink
Just cuz it has happened before doesn't mean it has to happen again, and that one should let it happen again. Worse, people are actually denying that it even happened, when it was so blatant.
And when that pre-match condition was set it was based on honor, with both sides expected to be honest. Ponting and his men clearly violated that honor- it shows they know nothing about moral codes, honor, and ethics. But then what do you expect from the people of a nation that has gone from barbarism to decadence without civilization in between?
FYI, 1984 is a novel based on real people and their deeds. And the behavior/characteristic defined by the term Orwellian is not fictional. Doing something wrong and shouting at the top of your lungs that no we haven't done it is a real life behavior- as defined by the term Orwellian.
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 01:24 PM Permalink
What unclean catch? The ball was in control and he put it on the ground. The umpires definition of in control is all that matters. The only exception is the boundary but in this case that is not relevant. I thought he had control, you may feel differntly however it is the umpires interpretation. So he caught the ball on the full and had control of it. Why wouldn't you claim it as a catch?
RE:Credibility?
by Ravi Jain on Jan 08, 2008 12:46 PM Permalink
Nice try! To me, the entire episode looks preplanned and well crafted by Symonds and his colleagues to take revenge on Harbhajan Singh and India in general, in response to the controversies during the recent Australian tour in India. Oh, by the way, while we are talking about match fixing and official corruption, have you forgotten the eposode of Shane Warne accepting money from bookies and how Australian officials "privately" dealt with the matter and tried to hide it (and almost succeeded)? You are no angels mate.
Also, my friend, do not get confused between aggressive play and cheating. People like you simply use the former to cover up the latter. Yes, we all know Australia is a great cricket team. But I wonder, what percentage of that greatness is due to systematic deception. Have you seen TV replays of Ponting's appeal after a grounded catch?
RE:RE:Credibility?
by Ravi Jain on Jan 08, 2008 12:53 PM Permalink
And one more thing. You talk about poor umpiring in India in 70's. I wasn't around in 70's, so I can't say anything about it. But I was very much around in 80's and 90's and following cricket. My friend, Australian umpires were the worst and most partisan. Countless horrendous decisions. Australia owes several of their famous victories in that period to home umpires. Look in your backyard first before commenting on your neighbour's.
RE:Credibility?
by Jay on Jan 08, 2008 12:26 PM Permalink
pointing was throuwn out of a nightclub for misbehavin with woman. btw who let u into this forum? moderator take his nonsense msg off
RE:Credibility?
by Doogie Hauser on Jan 08, 2008 12:37 PM Permalink
No. Ponting was flattened by a bouncer and thrown out for misbehaving. I have no arguments that Punter is one of the worst Oz captains ever. However we think Simmo is as honest as the day is long, thats why we are defending them. BTW, its more interesting to see Indian forums, its like watching a car wreck.
RE:RE:Credibility?
by George Wenzel on Jan 08, 2008 01:06 PM Permalink
Does your definition of Honesty and credibility change by the day or situation or the prsons involved?
RE:Credibility?
by sriram gupta on Jan 08, 2008 12:24 PM Permalink
Typical Australian fan. Sorry mate, you got it all wrong. Australia is known for it's wonderful invention to cricketing world called Sledging. The context is related to the allegations on Harbhajahn. How does it relate to fixing? In fact our board banned the fixers for a long time unlike SA. Yeh, Indians are charged for ball tampering. Now who was the umpire in that match? Need I say? Now who was the first one banned for racism issue in cricket? NEED I SAY? Australian cricket is known for it's dirty tactics in the field. Now they are crying like babies when they have been treated with same medicine that they have given to the world teams upto now. Don't support your team for the sake of it. Think what's really in your mind. Sorry if you don't get it even now, please leave rediff forum as all people here agree with me unanimously.
RE:Credibility?
by Harit Shah on Jan 08, 2008 12:31 PM Permalink
Mr. Hauser, MARK WAUGH AND SHANE WARNE (SUPPOSEDLY ONE OF THE BEST SPINNERS EVER) WERE SUSPECTED OF MATCH FIXING!!! IT IS ONLY BECAUSE OF YOUR COWARD CRICKET BOARD THAT CHOSE NOT TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT THAT THEY ESCAPED!!! SO GET YOUR FACTS STRAIGHT FIRST AND THEN TALK!!! AND YOU OBVIOUSLY THINK THAT IF ANYONE OF YOUR COUNTRY MAKES AN ACCUSAITON AT SOMEONE ELSE, HE IS RIGHT, WITHOUT GIVING THE CASE A FAIR TRIAL!! YOU JOKERS!!! BY THAT LOGIC, AUSSIE CRICKETERS WOULD BE HAVING A LIFETIME WORTH OF SUSPENSIONS!! GET REAL AND STOP LIVING IN A WORLD OF DENIAL. AND BY THE WAY, THE ICC HAS BANNED THE SUSPENSION OF BHAJJI!! SO WE HAVE THE LAST WORD!! HAHAHA!!!!!
RE:Credibility?
by Super User on Jan 08, 2008 12:23 PM Permalink
PS. CA found Mark Waugh and Shane Warne party to match fixing but decided to go easy on them, so as not to disturb a winning combination.
Umpire Hair is a classic example for bais towards Asian players.
Moin Khan was suspended for 5 matches in 2003 for claiming a grassed catch. On that account shouldn't Ponting be suspended for atleast 8 matches, 5 for claiming a grassed catch and atleast 3 for vouching Clarke's grassed catch?
Lillie and Co have openly admitted to bettig against the team in the early 80s, theres corruption for you...need I go on?
RE:Credibility?
by Nikhil Karkhanis on Jan 08, 2008 12:22 PM Permalink
Excellent example of partial memory loss and lopsided interpretation of events. Keep at it and you may actually get to captain Australia one day. Going by recent past, you seem to be well-qualified.
RE:Credibility?
by natraj tanjore on Jan 08, 2008 12:36 PM Permalink
Dear Doogie (Mind you i didnt use Doggie!) Greetings! Some questions to you Mate. 1. Who gave pitch report and weather conditions to the bookies? 2. Who bowled under arm on the final ball of a international ODI ? 3. Who bullied the batsman and the umpire after taking a catch which was clearly grounded. 4. Who called a bowler chucker when his spin could not be fathomed. 5. Who turns a blind eye to a fast bowler since retired now and another bowling now who also bend their arm by 15 degrees and both clearly chuck when bowling a yorker / short pitch balls? 6. Who cried mummy when sarwan gave one of the most fitting repartees in the history? 7. Who Called the South Africans / Srilankans derogatory names? 8. Who takes steroids and other enhancing substances and vociferously negates the need to introducing doping test in cricket? 9. Who cribs about hotel, food, crowd when they lose a match? 10. Who played with carbon fibre bats, bats with width exceeding the prescribed length, squash balls tucked in the gloves? 11. Who keeps using the words B-----D, F--- --F every now and then when they get plasterd for four or six runs? 12. Who refused to play in srilanka in world cup 1996 when the reason of fear of losing in sri lanka more than security? The list can go on mate, so dont open your mouth like ponting and symmonds when not warranted and make the old saying true " It is better to remain silent and be assumed as an idiot rather than open your mouth and remove all doubts about it!
Although Bucknor was a key villian in the Sydney drama due to his wrong decisions, I feel Benson is more at fault than Bucknor.
Bucknor made some errors that cost India the match but atleast he did not collude with the opposition captain to give wrong decisions i.e. Saurav given out by Ponting and Benson nodding his head to that.
Ideally both umpires mustbe kicked out, but if I had to make a choice it would be Benson.
RE:What about Benson?
by sriram gupta on Jan 08, 2008 12:26 PM Permalink
But Bucknor has a long history behind him which makes us think like he might have biased against us
RE:INDIAN CRICKETERS MUST FOCUS ON THE GAME AND NOT ON SYMPATHIES...
by George Wenzel on Jan 08, 2008 12:58 PM Permalink
Yes, Indian cricketers should focus on the game i.e. batting, bowling, and fielding and please leave Ponting free to focus on CHEATING. For one thing is sure that the Indian team can never match Ponting and his men in this aspect of the game which he can rightfully claim has his greatest contribution to the game to keep Cricket Australia on top
RE:INDIAN CRICKETERS MUST FOCUS ON THE GAME AND NOT ON SYMPATHIES...
by Adnan on Jan 08, 2008 12:11 PM Permalink
CONTRAVENTION OF CLAUSE C1 AS PER NOTE 5.1 ICC CODE OF CONDUCT.
AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ICC LAW PONTING SHOULD BE BANNED
RE:INDIAN CRICKETERS MUST FOCUS ON THE GAME AND NOT ON SYMPATHIES...
by parikshit guha on Jan 08, 2008 12:26 PM Permalink
what is that provison? we all want to know and shot for it .
Let's beware! This is NOT ENOUGH, Bucknor had to retire in any case.
We must not give in to such small carrots, but insist on Bhajji's clearance AND an apology from/ban on the liar Punter, as our conditions for continuing, else we should COME BACK.
Let's not forget that Procter too is part of the gang, though he is now worried and is trying to be friendly (I get along well with Indians, etc.). This was the same man who awarded the 2006 Oval test to England without even calling Pakistan for a proper discussion. (Remember his own SA, and his frustration from those days- his career was cut short- is what he is taking out on us now.)
RE:Harbhajan must be CLEARED or we QUIT.
by on Jan 08, 2008 05:09 PM Permalink
Bowden is not much better. Remember the Melbourne test...couldn't give a LBW to Kumble altho the appeals seemed quite valid. The NZ team even raised concerns about their own countryman Bowden's unpiring because they thought he was too chummy with the Aussies and too susceptible to Warne's appealing.
These whites destoyed hundreds of nations, divided India, killed millions in Latin America, do u think they will ever stand up and support a just cause from India ? India with it's new found confidence should throw out ICC and create it's own institution to run world cricket, if UK/Aus want to join, they can, that's all.
