.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Sight Screen

Tuesday, November 22, 2005

The Afridi Aftermath (-worma)

So we haven't heard the last of it yet. PCB, it seems, is going to enquire into the incident, which has been a pretty embarrassing one for them. Knowing a little bit about the ways of PCB, not sure what to expect from it(if anything at all). But to me, by the looks of it, this act surely warrants an extension of that three match sentence to probably a month or so.

Btw, I wasn't of this view when I first heard it, but then some of you guys described it in detail, and then later a friend detailed out the whole thing. That sounded hilarious, if only for the lack of basic sense on Afridi's part, and yes definitely punishable more strictly than match-fee deduction or some such.

For those of you who haven't seen the video, here's a link but not sure if it would work now. And this darn tool doesn't allow direct posting of videos. Anyone knows a working link?

Btw, Prem mentioned that he won't be on the blog, has a busy day today.


  • Worma - link does not work - can you please give us the name of the file ... we can do a search there and then see that file?

    By Blogger @mit, at 12:49  

  • First things first, when you tried a bigger font size, I liked that, shift back to that. That is more viewer friendly IMHO.

    Secondly, I don't know if I would agree to a months's ban, but I would have definitely like to see him banned from taking further part in this present match. I thought about it by keeping my self in the other person's shoes, if I were an England fan, it would have rubbed salt in my wounds seeing him do that stupidity yesterday and the very next day, as if nothing had happened, come out and take two (very important) wickets, and continue smiling and goofing around.

    I'm a hell of a lot dissapointed, in fact disgusted and infuriated with Afridi, he has let the whole nation down, and his actions have put a bad name to the reputation of Pakistan cricket (filmy dialogues I know, but true in this case). His apparent nonchalence today, especially by way of body language was un acceptable to me.
    His wicket celebrations should have been much less animated and his general body language through out less the day's play less intimidating.

    Yes, he did say he was sorry. But at least there should be some measure of regret that shows from his face. And exactly why hasn't he come out and done a live, press confrence, with a live apology, that is addressed personally to the England players, to the rest of his team mates, to the match officials and above all his numerous fans, and countless followers of the game in this country. He has let us all down, and we deserve more respect than an indirect apology, quoted by the match referee.

    Finally, I'm pleased the PCB have complained about the run out, it was dissapointing that Simon Taufel the best umpire in the game did not have the very basic rules of the game but my bigger worry is England's continued habbit of hurling down throw at batsman when they are perfectly inside their crease and a chance of a run out non existent.

    Law 38.2 only provides for protecting the batsman from being dismissed run out when he's taking evasive action and he is inside his crease, it does not give him any assurance against a bowler trying to knock of his temple with a mindless throw. England have been doing this for a long while, and other teams, should I say bowlers, including Pakistani ones do it too, it is totally unacceptable practice that should be taken notice of. It is only a matter of time before some one gets hurt.

    And hello hello? Why wasn't Ian Bell called in at the hearing that was held yesterday? Didn't he claim a catch that he knew (IMHO) he hadn't taken? I'm not saying he should have been handed a five match ban ala Rashid Latif, but at least the referee should have had a chat with him, letting him know what is expected of him in the future.

    And to think after all this, this this very England team, won the Spirit of Cricket Award. Yeah right. So much for spirit of the game. Resting in peace it is right now.

    By Blogger Zainub, at 12:59  

  • sourav resigns as bengal ranji captain
    dunno why he'd do that. mabbe a lil' birdie has told him that he's gonna be in the team soon

    By Blogger JD, at 13:11  

  • Worma:
    The link doesnt seem to work.
    Can you upload the file to this file hosting service, much more stable: http://www.megaupload.com/

    Want to see this video badly.

    Thanks in advance.

    By Blogger Hemal, at 13:11  

  • zainub - you got it perfectly right !!

    By Blogger @mit, at 13:15  

  • worma
    did u get the link for the vid from somewhere ro do u have the vid. if u have it there are a lot of sites where u can upload it for free
    megaupload.com, rapidshare.de

    By Blogger JD, at 13:16  

  • Alas, me getting it perfectly right doesn't matter. It's what Roshan Mahanama thinks that matters.

    By Blogger Zainub, at 13:20  

  • hemal: thx for that. Try this now

    By Blogger worma, at 13:23  

  • Worma:
    Thanks a tonne.

    By Blogger Hemal, at 13:27  

  • I think this is the worst test match from the perspective of "spirit of the game" ... just outright wierd

    By Blogger @mit, at 13:28  

  • zainub: not sure about the fonts why they act funny at times. Will ask Prem if he modified the settings (he has those controls)

    About Afridi, yes you're right about his actions today. But tell me one thing....do you have any plausable explanation in your head as to *why* he was doing it, except to gain unfair advantage with full awareness of the wrongness of the act. Can you think of even a hint of an excuse what he 'mistakenly' thought at that moment, except that probably the cameras were not on the pitch?

    And btw, I've read your post (on your blog) about it, and I know that Pakistan players were a bit frustrated with the happening of the day. But to me it has not even a slightest of bearings on Afridi's actions.

    This is why I said a month's ban. And yes, probably not bowl in the test too.

    About Inzy's runout, ofcourse I'm more than pleased that atleast someone complained to the ICC about another shoddy piece of umpiring. They seem to be getting away with too many mistakes recently.

    And yes, Bell should have been referred. I commented quite a few times already, atleast I had an impression that he was also not expecting a decision right away. Atleast it looked to me that he was expecting to be referred. And that would have been given notout on benefit of doubt.

    By Blogger worma, at 13:30  

  • zainub,

    welcome back. u've been missing for a few days

    By Blogger suraj, at 13:30  

  • What drama for the second test! There's something about Faislabad - isn't there? Disputed catches, disputed runout, scuttling the pitch, a bowler warned twice for running onto the danger area, what's next?

    IMHO Afridi's ban is appropriate, but I think he should have been prevented from bowling in this game as well. If a bowler treads on to the danger area unwittingly or otherwise, he is given two warnings and then on a third transgression he can't bowl in that innings - what Afridi did was far worse, 100% intentional and by all accounts much more damaging. It was funny how he looked around before twisting his spikes in around the good length area - is anybody watching??? NO dude, just 20 cameras! How silly can one get?
    All I can say is perhaps his batting is an appropriate pointer to his personality elsewhere too....

    One thing though, I actually think its great the way he has come back from all that - all the ban and warning would have cracked a lesser man - but I can't but admire how he is back to his aggro best so soon after an incident like that. Not much different from getting a life and hooking the next ball for six - is it?

    I don't think its in PCBs interests to get him banned for any longer. I think the team has made a statement by refusing to appeal the verdict. Why handicap itself by keeping him out of more games?

    By Blogger CricLover, at 13:32  

  • ohh...and did England win the spirit of the game award this time? Ahh well....didn't Nz, the worst of them all, win it last time. So atleast its consistent :-)

    Btw....about the throwing at batsman thing, I already wrote, and I'm hoping that the Indian team takes notice and is prepared to face it (or solve it before hand in a discussion)

    By Blogger worma, at 13:32  

  • zainub

    I had asked u last time abt Pak's reaction to their women playing cricket recently

    How did it go with general audience?

    By Blogger suraj, at 13:35  

  • Difficult to argue against that.

    But I would say, nevertheless that despite Afridi's mindlessness, for which a 3 match ban is an inadequate punishment, I don't really recall any other Pakistani player having breached the code of conduct, Shoaib's celebration today was a bit pointless but that you wouldn't call being against the spirit of the game. It's mostly the English players who have been the offenders, IMHO. But of course, the English fans will refuse to acknowledge this.

    By Blogger Zainub, at 13:35  

  • someone can post it in google video and send the link. i knwo google video helps u upload video clips

    By Blogger Balaji, at 13:38  

  • balaji, I posted the link in my comment above. You can download from there. Also I've modified the link in the main post, that also works now

    By Blogger worma, at 13:40  

  • I wonder when the first time will be that a non-gora team will be handed the "spirit of cricket" award? I think I'm going to be waiting a long time for that. When the goras have prolonged appeals, charge the umpire, question the umpire's decision and slegde, they are simply playing the game hard. But, when the non-goras do it, it's because we lack discipline and the gentleman's spirit the game should be conducted in. Think about it-- how often have we seen Ponting actually debating the umpire about a decision for a period of 20 minutes? How often have we seen Shane Warne react to an umpire's decision with a loud expletive and thoring his hands up in fury, followed with questioning the umpire's decision? How often have we seen Graeme Smith charge the umpire, all the way from 1st slip onto the pitch, while appealing? How often have we seen Andre Nel consistently sledging the batsmen throughout the match, only to be encouraged by his teammates and coach as being fiery? Have any of them even been fined? Imagine Sourav Ganguly or Inzi acting in this manner-- I guarantee you will be looking at long-term suspensions. I would love to see a general legal challenge of discriminatory application of the rules against players of color.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 13:42  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger Zainub, at 13:42  

  • zainub: Well there are transgressions and there are transgressions. Unfortunately what the English team does with the hurtling of ball at the stumps is not considered hurting the spirit of the game (atleast not seriously hurting :-)...its considered 'aggressive' attitude. Almost a trait these days. David Lloyd did say yesterday that he felt English players might stop using it after this incident, but I already read enough positive noises in favour as well. So now I doubt.

    By Blogger worma, at 13:43  

  • Worma ji,

    The video does not have Afridi's pitch mauling.. could it be that you uploaded the wrong video clip?

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 13:53  

  • santa bhaiyya: did you get the full file? Its taking a long time to download now that I try. Isn't it starting with Botham bhai chatting with Sanju?

    By Blogger worma, at 14:01  

  • santa,
    Afridi actually doesnt take a spade and shovel and dig out the middle (just kidding).
    See the guy turning around on his feet and then KP mimicking it?

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:04  

  • Yes Worma,
    It is 4.1 MB file and the duration is 2:09 minutes, but we don't get to see the *real* action.
    It is not a complaint, but was curious if you had uploaded the wrong file...

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 14:04  

  • Lol Toney, your earlier post about the interview was great as well....

    By Blogger CricLover, at 14:07  

  • santa: this is the file I got. Btw, as far as I understood, there is no other real action. When this happened the cameras on air (means the pics we were getting on tv) were not the ones which caught Afridi. Its after the damage was noticed that they checked other camera angles and found this out. And therefore, it can be seen as part of an analysis rather than actual pics (those would have been shown to third ump, referee etc)

    This is what I understood from the discussion...and what Botham said. I may be wrong though

    By Blogger worma, at 14:08  

  • Thanks toney,

    I played it again, and then I noticed it in the landscape. Lagta hai 12:00 baj gaye hain :-)

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 14:08  

  • Why did he do such a thing worma?

    I thought it could have been frustration, but as you said, his behavior today made that theory sound very dodgy.

    The only other reason I can think of is:

    Silliness, Foolishness, Insanity, Stupidity, Idiocy, Madness, Daftness, Senselessness… I could get my hand to a thesaurus if you will...

    By Blogger Zainub, at 14:11  

  • criclover,
    I would have been happier if there was a close up pic. Anyhow, Afridi owned upto it. What would have been funny was if he denied doing anything wrong as well.

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:11  

  • Yup Toney. It would have been real fun if Afridi had denied doing anything wrong.

    BTW Worma thanks for the clip.

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 14:13  

  • Actually, I remember the peerless SRT running on the pitch, when batting in the second innings against NZ (same one where he got a double 100). Fleming reacted angrily though, personally, I found it amusing.

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:13  

  • He couldn't have. That would be even more silly, foolish, insane, stupid, idioctic, mad, daft, senseless then actually doing it. I would have felt inclined to throw a tomoto at him in such a case if I was the macth referee.

    By Blogger Zainub, at 14:15  

  • worma,
    "any plaus[i]ble explanation in your head as to *why* he was doing it, except to gain unfair advantage with full awareness of the wrongness of the act."

    You has this query in an earlier post to Zainub. My take is Afridi did it to gain an advantage in the game, knew there was a great likelihood of getting caught, BUT probably though he would get away with a fine at the most.

    One issue of concern for me is that there is no punishment assessed during the game. Do you guys think there ought to be some deduction of runs in instances of pitch or ball tampering? I mean a team can gain a huge unfair advantage in one big game-- say a World Cup final-- and accept their suspension later. It's somewhat similar to the argument that suspect actions ought to be dealt with by the square leg umpire no-balling the specific deliveries he thinks are being "thrown."

    By Blogger Sahir, at 14:15  

  • zainub :-) I guess those will do....as none of them are close to innocence or ignorance, coz thats what I don't think it was. Btw, if you have the heart, do watch the video I gave in that link. Look at him listening to KP's complaint (and avoid looking at KP's hair ;-) and you'll see that you didn't need to wait till today to arrive at that judgment.

    Well....I guess thats how he is, part of the package. Its a wonder Woolmer gets so much out of him.

    By Blogger worma, at 14:16  

  • I haven't seen the video , so can't really comment about , 'why' he did it. If nothing, this just points to loose morals.

    On another note, How is Afridi as a person really? What is his back ground, is he educated?

    In any case, I don't think Pakis need to do anything like extending the ban etc. There are so many transgressions by Eng and other teams, there is no point in handicapping yourself by banning him further. Just concentrate on the game and reprimand him sternly. Thats it. Pak should win this series and teach the poms a lesson. Period

    By Blogger flute, at 14:17  

  • zainub,
    cool down. This was Afridi's version of madness and stupidity. Much as I want Pak to win this, I wish the game was abandoned. After all, whats a Pak Eng series without some controversies. Also, this would have prevented the English Lords from claiming that this was why they lost the series.

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:19  

  • sahir: yeah agreed. A good idea is to have a red card system. The player cannot take part further in the game. Atleast team feels the pinch immediately.

    By Blogger worma, at 14:19  

  • Zainub?
    Shouldn't it be Zunaib?
    Anyway, why throw a tomatoe at him when you have a potatoe? :-)

    Whatever cons Afridi may have in him, but he is always a treat to watch be it batting/bowling/fielding. And this is true ever since he made his debut.

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 14:21  

  • Have to leave, but will come back to comment on one or two things, for the moment, just one thing, flute, please don't call us pakis. I don't like the term.

    www.answers.com/paki for details
    or google paki+definition

    By Blogger Zainub, at 14:22  

  • flute,
    as far as I know, he's from Pathan land, speaks Pashtun. Maybe, Zainub can give details. Education has nothing to do with this. Wasnt Atherton guilty of ("accidentally") finding some dirt and vaseline in his pocket? And where did he study?

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:22  

  • Guys this is off topic- but still interesting to me.

    In a recent TOI interview SG claims his run aggregate for the last year was only 15 shy of RD.

    I knew he was lying otherwise we wouldnt be so mad about him still being in the team if he performed that well. so i just went to stat guru and did a search for last season (this is what i found!)

    Test Matches
    Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
    SG 9 363 88 30.25 0 3 2 1/14 52.50 0 3 0
    RD 11 841 160 56.06 3 4 - - - - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - - - - 25 0

    Mat Runs HS BatAv 100 50 W BB BowlAv 5w Ct St
    SG 9 178 55 19.77 0 1 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - -0 2 0
    RD 10 512 104 56.88 1 5 - - - - - -- - - - - - - -- - - -- - - - - - - 6 0

    So i can now conclude that SG has been reduced to the level of BLATANT LYING to get in the team.

    For those who belive in GC email this isnt the first time he is lying though :).

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 14:23  

  • -:), why not pakis?

    din't get any info on google, care to explain?

    By Blogger flute, at 14:24  

  • Hey guys ... i dont think this is the full video .... i saw the full replay during yest play. This video shows him scruffing one end of the pitch only ....

    actually he does the exact same thing at the other end of the pitch .... and there is another paki dude standing right next to afridi as he comes of the pitch ...

    he says something to afridi ....
    which i definitly dont know what it was ...but to me it looked like "dude did u scruff it up real nice" ; and definitly not one wuld have ideally said under the circumstances " dude WTF r u doin??"

    By Blogger srik, at 14:25  

  • flute, it is considered derogatory by some people, thats all. A lot depends on the usage.

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:25  

  • flute, FYI

    Pak·i (păk'ē)
    n. Chiefly British Offensive Slang., pl. Pak·is.
    Used as a disparaging term for a person from Pakistan or neighboring countries or for the descendant of such a person.

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 14:25  

  • Zainub, if there is any offensive meaning to pakis, I will refrain from using it. Please do care to explain.

    but, I cannot stop using it just coz you don't like. I used it purely as 'indians','hindustanis' etc.

    By Blogger flute, at 14:26  

  • Ok, I get it..no more 'paki' term

    By Blogger flute, at 14:27  

  • worma,
    Even the red card system has its flaws. What would prevent a batsman scruffing up the ball or pitch if he's already batted twice and doesn't have a significant role left to play in the game? He may decide the potential reward of getting more turn, uneven bounce or reverse swing is worth it in a big game. Therefore, I still advocate some sort of penalty on the scoreboard.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 14:27  

  • sahir
    Red cards in football have a ban of 2 games associated with it. And then, a review committee decides if the punishment is too light or too harsh

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:28  

  • yeah sahir, that's true. Probably same as in football...red card meaning suspension from next game as well. Because even in football the player about to come out can go and kick the opponent striker on his way out :-)

    But yes, cricket is more complicated. Here the scruffing up of the ball has its advatange for the others in the team as well.

    By Blogger worma, at 14:32  

  • toney...you sure it is a 2 game suspesnion? I thought you had to miss the next game if you get ejected.

    By Blogger Jiet, at 14:32  

  • rahul_fan: surely india have played more than 10-11 games in the last year.. there is something wrong in the stats you present

    By Blogger Chetan Reddy, at 14:32  

  • @chetan

    i got them from stat guru for the 04/05 season.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 14:34  

  • http://cricket.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1304718.cms

    By Blogger Chetan Reddy, at 14:35  

  • toney,
    I am aware of that, but my concern in cricket is that there is no punishment in the match in which the offence took place. What if it was a World Cup final during a tense run chase and a specialist batsman decided he wanted to tamper with the ball and would accept the subsequent suspension and dismissal from the field of play. His absence would not hurt the team greatly now that they are bowling in the closing stages of the game. The ball is going to do more and give the bowling side a much greater chance of winning a huge match. So what if the individual in question misses a couple of games after that. For that matter, what prevents a bowler who has finished his quota of overs in the first innings from tampering with the ball at the death of the innings to get more reverse swing. He'll be sent off, but maybe his team does not really need him in the chase since he bats at 11. Or better yet, bring in the supersub in his place.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 14:36  

  • Worma,
    A slightly different subject here..

    this is what u posted as Kiran More's comments:

    Winning matches against Zimbabwe should not be the criteria. We should be winning our matches and series against teams like Zimbabwe and Bangladesh. The fact is that we have not won a series on foreign soil in 19 years. Looking at the overall performance of Sourav, we are not happy," he said.

    No wonder Vengsarkar, Shashtri, Srikkanth, Azhar, SRT and finally Ganguly all got fired (or Dropped!)in quest of that illusive series victory. Some sooner than the others.

    Did some of those guys manage to win even ONE match on foreign soil? I wonder..( oh, exclude Ganguly from that otherwise there will be too many wins to bear).

    Yes, we do need more of MORE!

    By Blogger CrickTip, at 14:38  

  • I think the only way is to make the whole team responsible for a player's indiscretion, in situations where the team benefits from a player's illegal actions.

    Deducting the runs etc will artificially change the outcome of the game which is not good. IMHO, when we make a team responsible, the rule should allow to negate the advantage and stop short of punishing the team. All punishment should be meted out the player not to the team.

    If you agree with my above thinking, now what provisions in the law will achieve that?

    By Blogger flute, at 14:39  

  • flute,
    "the rule should allow to negate the advantage"

    Isn't part of negating the advantage punishing the team? If you get the ball to start reversing because you took a bottle-top opener to it, hasn't the team gained a significant advantage that must be negated. You may say change the ball, but that is if the umpires pick up on it immediately. It only takes one reverse-swinging yorker to possibly completely change the course of a game. What about tampering with the pitch? Hasn't the team batting last been put at a serious disadvantage? If the entire members of the opposing team have been put at a disadvantage by an individual's actions, why shouldn't the entire team be punished (on the scoreboard, that is) in order to restore parity?

    "Deducting the runs etc will artificially change the outcome of the game which is not good."

    Isn't ball tampering and pitch tampering "artificially chang[ing] the outcome of the game" as well?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 14:46  

  • cricktip: mate when we discussed this I think most agreed that More was probably wrong in that statement, or misquoted or misunderstood or whatever. Bottomline, we know it was time to move beyond SG's captaincy (atleast I already accepted that)...and thats what they did. Right?

    By Blogger worma, at 14:48  

  • flute,

    instead of deducting the runs you can suspend the player from the match as others have suggested but my twist would be to use it like the red card in soccer...let the offending team play with 10 players the rest of the match...that should be a BIG deterrent

    By Blogger vida, at 14:50  

  • ofcourse it still punishes the team as a whole...but it will atleast mean the team will strive to keep such idiots out

    By Blogger vida, at 14:52  

  • Sahir, if you try to understand my point of view, I only meant to allow everything to negate the advantage stopping short of putting the offending team at a disadvantage. Basically, if a ball is tampered, change the ball, not reduce the runs etc. If pitch is tampered with, it can be repaired, what can damaged with legs can be repaired with hands , IMHO.

    I don't have definite idea about it, I am trying to come up with general guidelines along which provisions can be thought about.

    By Blogger flute, at 14:54  

  • jiet,
    I thoght it was 2 game suspension for a red card and one game for two yelow cards in different games. I am not sure though. And playing conditions differ anyhow.

    By Blogger Toney, at 14:56  

  • rahul fan:

    Lets not start another SG discussion here --lets stick to Afridi.

    As to the point you raised, it has already been discussed on this blog yesterday and day before. SG was talking about ODI statistics and someone posted that his numbers (based on the number of games that this person chose as the reference for comparison), which were comparable to RD. The reason you get different results (as you did in your analysis) is because your frame of reference includes a different set of games. The fact of the matter is neither you nor I, or for that matter, the other poster had any idea which games SG used to draw his conclusions.

    So lets just leave the matter and stop digressing into how this provides circumstantial backing to GC's allegations on the email.

    As has been pointed out by quite a few people in the past, GC's email is GC's opinion, a lot of which has been shown to be inaccurate --so at best, GC may have jumped the gun while drawing his conclusions.

    This topic has been beaten to death, SG is no longer captain in either ODI's or tests, he is not even in the ODI team -- so for all practical purposes he is not a topic for discussion anymore.

    So lets drop the topic before this discussion gets hijacked as well and turned into another character assassination session.

    By Blogger kban1, at 14:57  

  • vida,
    "let the offending team play with 10 players the rest of the match...that should be a BIG deterrent"

    Is it a big deterrent in all situations? Say it is the World Cup final and Pakistan are bowling first. The innings is into the 40th over or so with Shoaib and Sami ready to bowl. The opposing team is 6 wickets down looking to take some singles and keep the scoreboard ticking. Danish Kaneria, who has bowled hs full quota, decides to tamper with the ball by taking out a bottle-top opener and scruffing up one side of the ball. The ball begins to reverse prodigiously for Akhtar and Sami. Kaneria gets caught and sent off. Is Pakistan going to miss Kaneria's batting from the number 11 position? What about his fielding for the last 10 overs when almost all deliveries will be lethal reverse-swinging yorkers spearing in towards the stumps? He may receive a 3 game suspension later, but wouldn't a 20-25 run difference in the chase required in a World Cup final be worth it?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 14:59  

  • Sahir,
    twada point sahi hai, but I think you are micro-analysing the situations here.

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 15:02  

  • flute,
    "if a ball is tampered, change the ball, not reduce the runs"

    What if the umpires do not pick up that the ball has been tampered with for an over? If two wickets happen to fall to reverse-swinging yorkers in that over, does the umpire call those batsmen back and negate the over? Of course, the umpire couldn't be sure exactly when the tampering took place (checking the ball after each delivery seems illogical).

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:02  

  • santa from nj,
    I am micro-analyzing, but isn't that what most of us rather passionate followers of the game on this blog do? Try and address the finer aspects of the game?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:04  

  • Speaking of Afridi:

    Shouldn't the cricket rule books have some sort of provision that bans a player from bowling for the rest of the match.

    After all running onto the danger area entails 2 warnings followed by the bowler being banned from bowling. In the case of intentional pitch destruction, a bowling ban should be enforced immediately.

    If the person doing it is a batsman, then the culprit should be prevented from batting again. Just to make it uniform, I support no further part in the game for the player (as some have suggested). Also, maybe worth considering is the fact that the team should play with 10 players for the rest of the match, depending on the severity of the transgression.

    And on a related note, how can the ICC ban captains (Inzi, SG, graeme Smith) for 2-6 matches for slow over rates while an offence such as this gets a moderate punishment. Admittely SG and Graeme Smith had been serial offenders, but is a serial offense of not finishing obers in time exceed the offense of deliberate pitch tampering ?

    By Blogger kban1, at 15:04  

  • kban1: I think this particular act of Afridi would not even be covered by the ICC rule book...probably applied a 'acting against spirit of the game' or some such clause. After all, they can't have invented a '5 match ban' kind of rule for this act *now* and applied it to Afridi, could they?

    By Blogger worma, at 15:15  

  • @Kaban1,

    although not as a topic of discussion for the other bloggers, but just as a conversation between you and me. Tell me how you explain this statement of yours:

    "GC's email is GC's opinion, a lot of which has been shown to be inaccurate --so at best, GC may have jumped the gun while drawing his conclusions"

    maybe i missed the news recently....but can you please
    tell me which part has been "SHOWN" to be inaccurate?

    I request other bloggers not to respond to this as it will start another SG vs. EVERYTHING GOOD war here

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 15:15  

  • sahir, so what do you think needs to be done in such situations?

    if a ball was tampered and we don't know when it was done, how do you decide the runs to be deducted?

    By Blogger flute, at 15:19  

  • Was the damaged pitch later repaired by the curator?

    By Blogger Tiger, at 15:21  

  • sahir,

    in your hypothetical situation, if a ball has been tampered with, the umpires change the ball...and if they find the guilty player, they redcard him then and there...

    ofcourse a more radical suggestion would be to give the opposition team the choice to redcard/replace (i would prefer replace in this case) whomever they want..:))..that would be some rule

    By Blogger vida, at 15:23  

  • flute,
    I agree that the number of runs deducted is the bone of contention, and I haven't given thought to how many should be deducted, in what situation, etc. But, obviously more or less ought to be deducted based on the gravity of the infraction. The ICC probably needs to set up some sort of committee to assess what would be approprite. Maybe another formula such as D/L taking into account the nature of the game (i.e. run rate, runs scored, etc.)?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:23  

  • vida,
    "in your hypothetical situation, if a ball has been tampered with, the umpires change the ball...and if they find the guilty player, they redcard him then and there..."

    That's assuming the umpires pick up on the ball tampering right away. What if it takes them an over and two batsman are cleaned up with reverse-swinging yorkers?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:28  

  • sahir...if itsn't picked up by the umpires it is incompetence on the part of the umpires...there would be no rule that can compensate for the incompetence

    By Blogger vida, at 15:32  

  • sahir, exactly, which is what I suggested. The ICC probably needs to set up some sort of committee to assess what would be approprite without changing the scoreboard. In all your hypothetical siuations, ICC committee can decide the provisions giving discretionary powers to umpires.

    By Blogger flute, at 15:33  

  • Sahir,
    If the ball has been tampered, and 2 batsman are cleaned up with normal yorkers, i.e. straight deliveries OR the batsmen were c&b?

    By Blogger santa_from_NJ, at 15:34  

  • vida,
    The umpires don't have eyes at the back of their head. If a player scruffs up the ball behind his back, how are the umpires going to know until they inspect the ball? And since they do not inspect it after every delivery, it could take them a while. That can hardly be classified as incompetence.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:35  

  • Can someone dig up scores to see if Afridi caused havoc with his bowling when playing against India in Pakistan? Wondering if he resorted to pitch tampering then too. After all habits die hard.

    By Blogger babi, at 15:37  

  • santa,
    "If the ball has been tampered, and 2 batsman are cleaned up with normal yorkers, i.e. straight deliveries OR the batsmen were c&b? "

    My point exactly-- you wouldn't necessarily know if the tampering directly resulted in the wickets-- you can never know that. So shouldn't there be an automatic punishment within the game of a stipulated number of runs based on the gravity of the offence? I'm sure that would serve as a tremendous deterrent. I doubt any player would ever do such a thing if the entire team would be punished on the scoreboard.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:38  

  • If you had a runpenalty system in place, I doubt you would have to enforece it. I'm sure it would cause a tremendous amount of self-policing.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:39  

  • babi,
    "Can someone dig up scores to see if Afridi caused havoc with his bowling when playing against India in Pakistan? "

    Doesn't matter; we beat Pakistan in Pakistan, in both the Tests and ODIs. :-)

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:40  

  • sahir, in a situation where if a ball is tampered with and the umpires did not notice it until after a few overs, I think ICC should appoint a committee to come up with a solution. -:)

    By Blogger flute, at 15:40  

  • I am sure England will now be arranging for someone to keep an eye on the pitch at night - what are the chances of a bearded guy coming wrapped in a blanket and stomping all over the pitch at midnight before England bat again Thursday??? :)

    By Blogger CricLover, at 15:42  

  • Sahir: Good one, but we could have whitewashed without Afridi's doctoring skills:-)

    By Blogger babi, at 15:42  

  • sahir, that is the duty of the umpires- to inspect the ball and make sure it is ok....suppose in your hypothetical situation, the umpires discover the ball has been scruffed...how would they know when the scruffing took place? 1 over back or 50 overs back?...even if we implement your plan to subtract runs/wickets, you cannot penalize a team if you dont know the exact time when the incident has taken place...

    and if they happen to discover the scruffing has taken place between overs (say they inspect every over), here are my suggestions:
    1. Redcard the player involved if he is found
    2. Consider all 6 balls in the previous over as no balls.

    By Blogger vida, at 15:44  

  • sahir, what is a bowler tampers with a ball and even before he bowled a single ball, umpire caught him and there is no way to find out what is the effect? in such situation, don't you think we are altering the result of the match artificially?

    Also, what if a bowler tampered with the ball, tried reverse swing but could never get any results out of it, and if he is caught and if the runs are deducted, we are basically altering the result of the game. Don't you think, it is unfair to the team concerned?

    By Blogger flute, at 15:44  

  • criclover, good one lol -:)

    By Blogger flute, at 15:46  

  • flute,
    About altering the result artificially:
    How many players would take the risk of tampering if they knew the punishment would involve an automatic run deduction? I'd guess almost none. Certainly a lot less than it is currently done. Therefore, if you accept that tampering also artificially alters the result of the game, the number of games artificially altered would be less. BTW, good one on the ICC committee solution.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:50  

  • flute,

    totally weird analogy - if you make a bomb but the bomb doesn't go off, it still means you are a bomb maker and are liable for prosecution...same case for the tampering...

    and as for the person found tampering, get him out of that game pronto..redcard or substituting

    By Blogger vida, at 15:52  

  • vida,
    I like your idea of automatically invalidating the previous over. Plus the third umpire and match referee should always get the pictures within an over or two of the tampering and can alert the umpires of what took place.

    What do you think about the umpire checking the ball after every over for significant alteration in condition?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 15:53  

  • sahir,

    the noballing would mean that the runs scored will stay (both for batsman and against the bowler) but wickets wont count...ofcourse logistics such as getting the correct batsman and runner etc might turn out to be a nightmare...

    good discussion..keep it going..i have to rush off to lunch...later

    By Blogger vida, at 16:00  

  • Hey Sahir, this discussion is going along too nicely for my liking. Can I make an SG comment and then disrupt it? :)

    By Blogger Toney, at 16:13  

  • Toney,

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:16  

  • Disrupt away

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:16  

  • rahul fan:

    just between you and me --

    GC's main allegations were
    1) VVS issue (dividing the team) --this is unresolved as the committee did not call VVS to the hearing.

    2) He plays politics with the middle order batsmen because that helps him protect his spot. He is friendly to the bowlers because that helps him create cliques in the team -- Well, I do not know whether this can ever be proved or disproved unless you bring Kaif, Dravid, Yuvraj, SRT, and VVS in the review committe and ask them point blank.

    But you can choose to believe the GC email (after all it could be plausible that an out of form captain is indulging in politics) or you can try to deduce logically using pyschology.

    If I as a captain have fought for some players, advocated their selection, and backed them even when they were not doing so well, then as an individual, I have a right to expect some loyalty from them --human nature only, does not mean it is intended to create cliques. So that takes care of the bowler pampering (in order to create cliques) charge.

    As for the middle order batsmen, during the past 3 years when Kaif and Yuvi have failed, I remember SG always publicly backing his middle order bats and claiming they are talented, they will strike form soon and that it is difficult to judge #6 and # 7 bats in a one day situation because of when they come in to bat. The only other middle order bat is VVS (RD and SRT are guaranteed selections), and while people on this blog have gone wild alleging that SG has sabotaged VVS (most notably during WC 2003), I remember reading in the vernacular press that SG wanted VVS in the team but was overruled by the selectors. So again, there is no cut and dry evidence backing or refuting this allegation -- you can choose to believe the allegation or extrapolate from past happenings and choose not to believe it. Under any circumstance, it is all based on belief (which by definition is blind) not on evidence. So another unresolved issue.

    3) Injury / faking injury (based on his impressions and his conversations with some players) -- SG's refutation of these charges (which was also leaked to the media) indicate (acording to SG) that he felt the injury, had the physio check him out, got treatment, could not continue, and retire. He said he could not go for a test as no facilities were available where the game was played -- this was backed by the physio, who also was incidentally present in the review meeting. At the end of the meeting, Mahendra clearly said to the press that GC was wrong about the injury --this was a press statement. So at best, this was GC's erroneous conclusion.

    4) Avoids the new ball by faking injuries (this goes along with the 2nd allegation) -- SG's refutation was that he did face the new ball with VVS after specifically asking RD to retire (since RD had already scored a 100) the previous night. SG also said verification of this might be sought from RD if required.

    5)He is not serious about fitness / avoids fitness routines -- SG showed to the review committee proof of his fitness / exercise reviews that indicated he not only did the exercises prescribed but also did more than what was required. All of this was in the presence of the physio (in the review meeting). the documentation he provided was duly signed by the support staff.

    6) Changes batting order / paces nervously in the dressing room, which makes other players nervous -- there is no refutation to this, nor is there a need for it. Altering the batting order is a captain's prerogative --through the years, a captain, based on how the game is going on in the middle, has achanged batting orders, and will continue to do so. SG may or may not have provided an explanation for why he did it, but that is hardly a basis to declare him unfit for captaincy. same for pacing the dressing room - most captains feel the pressure --some sit still, some pace up and down, some sleep (Inzy), others chew up their nails down to the skin --again a rather flimsy ground to say that is making the other players nervous and therefore shows SG is not fit for captaincy. After all these other players are professionals too and they are expected to cope with the pressure.

    So as you can see allegations 1 & 2 are unresolved and will continue to be so until someone or a few of the principals involved come out with their autobiographies (the review committee could have resolved the issue but they did not).

    Allegation 6 is GC's impression. It can never be proved or disproved. In fact, I personally find it quite a bit of a stretch for reasons I have outlined above.

    Allegations 3, 4, and 5 have been refuted. The refutations are supported by documentation / corroborating testimony. The refutation of the injury allegation, furthermore, has been unequivocally seconded by the Board President in his press briefing (this prompted Prem Panicker's famous Article --Is GC a liar, Mr, Mahendra ?). Incidentally, the article was written much before accounts of SG's refutations and what happened in the review committee were made public, so I do not blame PP for his opinion.

    But the fact is subsequent information (as outlined above)has shown that at best GC jumped the gun on some issues (the other issues are unresolved). And at worst, his complaints may have been motivated. If anything, I would find some fault with GC for sharing with the media his opinion that AN, ZK, HS and SG are "cancers" of the team. Furthermore, what could be more divisive than a coach openly asking other players what they think of the captain's injuries ?

    Do not get me wrong --I am not absolving SG of his failings -- being out of form, being a non performing player /captain or the biggest of them all --not having the sense to keep shut about what was essentially a dressing room dispute.

    My point is that the GC email is half unsubstantiated. The part that has been substantiated shows GC made, at the very best, an error in judgment. So it is a poor instrument to cast doubt on SG's character.

    By Blogger kban1, at 16:21  

  • vida, in case of a bomb analogy, only one person is liable and is punishable. In case of the cricket, a team game, punishment to the player is not debatable. Of course the player needs to be punished. My point from the beginning is, we should try and let the game continue in the most unaltered way possible, so that the ultimate people who count, the fans are not robbed of any good,hard faught,fair sporting competition. Hence my premise, teams should not be punished, merely the unfair advantage gained should be negated, so that a good competitive game continues.

    Run deduction, banning a player from the present game etc alters the nature of the game and we are no longer assured of a fair game.

    By Blogger flute, at 16:22  

  • kban1,
    I just wanted to give you props on a very well-thought, thorough and lucid response. Whether the rest of us agree or not, I'm sure all us bloggers can appreciate the someone putting the sort of time you probably did in order to adequately respond to a query of a fellow blogger.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:29  

  • "what could be more divisive than a coach openly asking other players what they think of the captain's injuries ?"

    - great assessment.

    By Blogger SS, at 16:31  

  • Sahir:

    Thanks. And my apologies to all the bloggers --it is definitely not my intention to open up the SG issue. I think the time has come to let the issue lie for the time being and see what tidings the days ahead bring.

    Personally, I hope SG gets another chance and comes good, because I would definitely want aperforming SG in the tem. If he doesn't, then we know he is past his expiry date and Team India can move on.

    By Blogger kban1, at 16:34  

  • Well just to clarify (not wanting to get into a debate one way or another), I believe Chappell did not "openly ask[] other players what they th[ought] of the captain's injuries." It was more along the lines of him questioning why Sourav had come off the field and the players responded that is just "Sourav being Sourav"-- still a jump to a conclusion, or I guess some would say deductive reaosning depending which side of the fence you are on.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:36  

  • kban,
    Yeah... I don't think anybody could question a Sourav Ganguly of the late 90s, performing exceptionally well with the bat, wouldn't be an asset to the team. If he does get another chance, I would definitely want him to succeed as well. Although, just for fairness purposes I ought to reveal my personal opinion as well-- I don't feel he deserves the chance as a batsman right now. Maybe after scoring heavily in 3 or 4 domestic games, but not in the current form.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:40  

  • Sahir:

    May well be the case. Although I remmebr the email saying "I asked around" or something similar -- thats why I said what I did. Fact is no one knows the actual events and so I may either be wrong or right on that point.

    By Blogger kban1, at 16:41  

  • sorry, wouldn't above should be would

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:42  

  • SG quit as captain of Bengal:


    This means he will be in Test team.

    By Blogger Rajg, at 16:43  

  • kban,
    absolutely right regarding the facts-- really VVS Laxman holds the key, but I don't think the BCCI wants to reveal that info. Obviously, the initial plan was for the 2 to strike up a working relationship again. Although, I do wonder whether Chappell could have come up with such an elaborate lie as confronting Sourav about the issue in fornt of VVS, when it can easily be denied by VVS? We won't know for sure until VVS comes out with his autobiography.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:45  

  • Rajg,
    I agree SG will likely be in the Test squad (although I feel he won't be in the playing XI-- if I'm not mistaken, the playing XI is generally chosen by the coach in consultaion with the captain; the seletors just decide on the squad, while the captain chooses the lineup; of course, all are involved in the decision-making process, but I believe the final decision rests as I laid it out), but I don't feel relinquishing the Bengal captaincy is necessarily an indicator of that. He may just feel it is better if a younger player gets an opportunity to captain and he may also not want to commit himself to that extent. Who knows?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 16:50  

  • if SG gets selected in the 14 and is not in the playing eleven, then various media outlets will have a field day. It is unneccessary fracas. If selectors want to take him, they better discuss with GC & RD, make sure they take him in the playing 11 and then select him. If there is no consensus, they better not select him. We just have a noisy,ugly fracas in Zim, don't want more.

    By Blogger flute, at 16:56  

  • Sahir,
    as to yr comments on SG being in the 15 but not in teh 11 -


    By Blogger Gardhabh, at 17:05  

  • gardhabh and flute,
    I definitely feel that no player should be selected as part of an appeasement process for the fans. As far as creating an unnecessary fracas: there will be a fracas if the team perfroms poorly, but if they perform well-- all will be forgotten, just like it was in the ODIs. In the article the person quoted that keeping a former captain as a substitute in the squad is the ultimate slap in the face. Why? I simply cannot understand the huge ego "slap in the face" mentality everyone seems to have. If the selectors feel Ganguly is the 5th best middle order batsman in India, shouldn't he be in the squad as the reserve?

    By Blogger Sahir, at 17:12  

  • BTW,
    Isn't it always a good idea to have an opener as a reserve batsman? When we had Parthiv as keeper, this was not necessary since he could do the job in case of an emergency, but what if Sehwag or Gambhir gets injured the morning of the match, or the day before and there is not enough time to fly out a replacement? Use a middle order batsman or the best local opener, I guess. I'd like to see Wasim Jaffer brought in as a backup opener-- great pair of hands could really contribute to the close in catching as a substitite fielder as well.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 17:17  

  • The fact that neither Yuvraj Singh nor Mohammad Kaif figure in the Board President’s XI side picked to play the warm-up game against Sri Lanka hints at their possible inclusion in the Test team. Should that happen, either Laxman or Ganguly will have to be left out as Gautam Gambhir, Virender Sehwag, Rahul Dravid, Sachin Tendulkar appear to be certainties in the batting line-up. However, Ganguly’s chances of making the Test team will only be known on Wednesday, “when we sit down for the selection committee meeting on Wednesday,” More said.

    “I respect the performance of Sourav and the way he has led the team, but Rahul Dravid has done very well in the limited opportunities he has been given as captain in the ODIs,” More said.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 17:29  

  • sahir, for once you are right. I take back my words. Selectors should not be thinking/worried about fracas and all such things. If they think SG should be in the 15, they should select him. If people think it is beneath him to be in 15 and still be not in playing 11, so be it.

    By Blogger flute, at 17:32  

  • If what appears in the above article holds true and selectors play to the tunes of the public and leave out Laxman to include Ganguly. What would that be????
    Old wine in a new bottle. Any thoughts????

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 17:33  

  • Ram, I don't think Lax place in test team is in jeopardy. Everybody agrees that he is too good to be left out. If he fails against SL which I hope not then he will be on the choping block.

    By Blogger squarecut, at 17:38  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 17:38  

  • Kaban1,

    you came up with a long reply but i am not sure if any of those points you made support your claim that GC was wrong in his email.

    you made 6 points.

    Points 1 and 2, by your own admission could still be right, and so we cannot say GC was wrong. infact i belive when VVS comes out with his version we will find out that SG was infact lying to him.
    Point 3. Just like you choose to belive in Mahendra's word that GC was wrong, i choose not to belive him. I trust GC's word and 100% believe that SG faked injury, so again you cant say GC was wrong.
    Point 4.GC claimed that SG wanted to avoid the new ball in that practicse match, i am not sure if you are talkin about the same match here. Maybe you are confused.
    Point 5. I am not sure if the physio or any other support staff were present in that review committee meeting. So i would still hold on to GC's claim that SG was not being serious about fitness.
    Point 6. Again here you admit that different people has different habits and exhibit several tendencies during those times. But a leader has to instill confidence his fellow member and by letting his nervousness out he cannot set a right example. That is why GC rightly pointed out that SG is no longer MENTALLY FIT to lead the team.

    so instead of coming up with big illogical points i would still like to see you succiently point out how GC was wrong.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 17:44  

  • Squarecut:
    The very thought of selectors and GC/RD combo trying to promote the mediocrity bought in by SG in the names of Yuvraj and Kaif over Laxman in tests is mind boggling. Atleast on accounts of the little piece that I found it does not appear as a certaintity. Does it???

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 17:45  

  • Sqaurecut:
    "If he fails against SL which I hope not then he will be on the choping block."

    Agreed 100%.

    But the above statement should apply to SRT as well as far as tests are concerned. Would you agree????

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 17:56  

  • LP Sahi :




    KKD Karthik confident:


    Saurav not Bengal captain too.


    By Blogger Dark Nights, at 17:56  

  • Dark Nights:
    Go to the below link. You will find more interesting stuff.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 18:03  

  • Ram, It applies to anybody in the team.

    But since GC himself keep supporting SRT
    inspite of his failures in ODI's I don't see that happening. In India SRT is far bigger than the game of the cricket and nobody would dare do that.

    SG should have gone a year back and it didn't happen.

    THe reason why Aussies are top side because they think nobody is bigger than the game.

    As along as team is winning there won't be too many changes but guys like VVS will only get the stick.

    By Blogger squarecut, at 18:07  

  • On the Afridi matter - I have seen the video footage and it looks just awful. The man is both a knave and a fool - any fool would know that several cameras would spot that action, even under those gas cylinder circumstances.

    The fact that the first thing he thought of when an explosion occured was to scratch up the pitch says a lot about the man. eyond my ken, but perhaps that's because I'm a gora, as discussed on another thread.

    An interesting possible twist is that Afridi's actions might just harm Pakistan in this match.

    Now that England are getting close to the Pakistan score, the "risk" of a result in this match offers more hope to England than it does to Pakistan, given the series position.

    If England can pull off a surprise win here (unlikely but possible now), there is an argument that Afridi's stupidity has turned a bore draw pitch into a result pitch.

    Afridi himself hardly needs such rough with his fast leg breaks (more like leg cutters, many of them) and his medium-paced straight-on'ers. But Giles and Udal might turn nothing into something in that little bit of rough.

    And I hope against hope that they do. The ultimate and most appropriate punishment that would be. Afridi hoisted by his own petard.

    By Blogger Ged, at 18:13  

  • Interesting one:


    By Blogger squarecut, at 18:26  

  • rahul fan

    Points 1 & 2 – we do not know the truth, so it is inconclusive. My point exactly – does not prove right or wrong. If you choose to believe GC, that is your prerogative, but like I said belief by definition is blind and requires no evidence whereas facts have to be substantiated. I choose to go by what can be substantiated.

    Point 3 – I did not choose to believe Mahendra’s word. Mahendra was one of the members on the review committee. So when he comes out and says something in the official press conference, that means the official decision of the review committee was to discount or disagree with GC’s allegation on that particular issue. That is an official statement of finding of the Review Committee.

    Point 4 – yes, I am talking about the practice match as well. SG and VVS played the 2nd new ball for a few overs before SG retired hurt. I suggest you retrace the events carefully (there are enough discussions on this blog if you care to go back to the relevant period as well as archived newspaper reports) and you will see what I am talking about.

    Point 5 – John Gloster was invited and he did attend the Review Committee meeting. Again, a little research will help you find out the truth. Again, you are free to hold whatever GC said about SG but that is based on perception / belief, not facts, which point elsewhere.

    Point 6 – A leader has to instill confidence, for sure. However, it is not the leader’s job to feed the other players with the help of a feeder bottle. When you are playing cricket (or any game) for your country, pressure is a part of the game. Ability to handle pressure makes an average player great while inability to do so makes a talented player mediocre on the big stage. Anyone who has played in a match (at any level) and has been in the dressing room will tell you that at the end of the day, when you are facing the bowler at the crease, it is just you and the bowler –mano-a-mano. What happened in the dressing room does not matter, neither does anything else but the ball and how you play it.

    So to say, the captain pacing around made them nervous does not cut much ice. In other words, if these players (as GC would have us believe) get so worried by seeing their captain, then maybe they are not good enough to cut it at International cricket. What I find more surprising is that SG was captain for 4 and a half years before GC arrived. His nervous pacing et all did not seem to affect the team that much then, did it ? Even when SG was out of form or did not score runs, others did. Which suggests to me that this argument is the weakest one that GC has put forward.

    Again you are welcome to your opinions –having played cricket, I just find this allegation remote and far fetched.

    By Blogger kban1, at 18:28  

  • From TOI

    Tale of two captains


    By Blogger squarecut, at 18:32  

  • rahul_fan,
    Not to say Greg Chappell was wrong in his e-mail, but when you ask for evidence that Chappell was wrong, it really is the worng way of looking at the matter. Whenever any allegations are made, the burden is on the alleging party to prove that his allegations are true, not on the responding party to prove they are false.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 18:42  

  • The alleging party in the instant case being Greg Chappell and responding party being Sourav Ganguly.

    By Blogger Sahir, at 18:44  

  • Sahir,
    relax.. mail has done its job.. Thanks Chappel.. I can enjoy my cricket now.. too long I have seen lethargy and "Chalta hai" .. and automatic selections in the team..

    By Blogger Thanks Chappel, at 18:49  

  • I guess this change in Indian cricket is really great. It has brought a new enthusiasm among cricket fans like me who had given up hope after a string of hopeless performances under Ganguly. Inspite of knowing that the chennai match could be rained off, I got up in the wee hours to see the game. Everyone has congradulated Dravind and Chappel for this turnaround but for this time in a long time the "Bunch of Jokers" as named by Amarnath need to be lauded for this change in Indian Cricket. I only hope that the BCCI elections and the winner one comes to power dont destroy this new development in Indian cricket.

    By Blogger Anand Balasubramanian, at 18:59  

  • thanks chappel,

    By Blogger Sahir, at 19:33  

  • Congratulations Dravidians on a terrific coup....RD's illustrious scores in the 5 tests he has captained India are 13,5,6,33,0,21,2,31,27...certainly good enough to replace SG who has only a 40+ average over 49 tests as India skipper...This can only happen again in India where Lord Rama(SG) was banished by his father (Kiran More) on 14 year exile to be replaced by Bharat(RD) at the behest of queen Kaikeyi..however (GC)....however the exile helped Rama doing more heroic acts like slaying the evil Ravana and his Dravidian army in Lanka.

    By Blogger Southie_joker, at 21:18  

  • Congratulations Dravidians on a terrific coup....RD's illustrious scores in the 5 tests he has captained India are 13,5,6,33,0,21,2,31,27...certainly good enough to replace SG who has only a 40+ average over 49 tests as India skipper...This can only happen again in India where Lord Rama(SG) was banished by his father (Kiran More) on 14 year exile to be replaced by Bharat(RD) at the behest of queen Kaikeyi..however (GC)....however the exile helped Rama doing more heroic acts like slaying the evil Ravana and his Dravidian army in Lanka.

    By Blogger Southie_joker, at 21:18  

  • If a player is found guilty of tampering, just award the match to the other team. Question is : what if the tampering is found after the game is over (in case of a 1-day). I say. still award it. There might be murmurs the first time, but nobody in their right mind would ever do it again if the penalty is loss of the game.
    Of course, the guilty player should be severly punished - 10 1-days and 5 tests.
    If the punishment is so severe (hopefully) nobody tries to take a chance?

    By Blogger Main Prem Ka Deewana Hoon, at 21:28  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:05  

  • Kaban1,

    as you have finally mentioned you were merely stating that "YOU FEEL" that the GC allegations were not true.

    I too have played criket, even though my playing cricket has nothing to do with the GC allegations and i dont know why you had to mention that you have played cricket. I 'FEEL' that GCs allegations were true.

    And Mahindras comments was not the official word, he did not say that the whole committee agreed that SG was not faking injury. Infact Shastry might have held another opinion. Mahendra was just giving out his opinion.

    Anyway, like TC has said......i am happy that GC email has had its effect and whether you belive it or not, that is the reason SG is out now and deservedly so.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:08  

  • Dravidian Fans...History repeats itself in India where Lord Rama(SG) was banished by his father (Kiran More) on 14 year exile to be replaced by Bharat(RD) at the behest of queen Kaikeyi (GC)....however the exile helped Rama doing more heroic acts like slaying the evil Ravana and his evil army of dravidian supporters in Lanka.

    By Blogger Southie_joker, at 22:17  

  • @southie

    in the present case........SG is ravana and Rama is GC.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:29  

  • @rahul_fan,
    I think one has to be too foolhardy to assume GC email has anything to do with truth rather than ass covering. GC email was just a leverage that was used by a political clique to get rid of SG. It is another matter that they got a spineless captain in RD to trudge along with GC.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:29  

  • @ SS

    if RD is a spineless captain, then you are as manly as Michael Jackson.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:33  

  • ..to understand GC's political ploys just scroll through his comments on Sachin from day one. He started with almost trashing his future. Then he flew back to AUS and observed the media reaction. The moment he got into figt with SG, he took the suck-up-SRT line. Even when SRt was scoring pathetically in Challenger, he started saying 'I have plans for SRT'. The battle lines were drwan and he was siding with one faction. Whatever you say, this man has the real power to destroy whatever good is there in the Indian team. Just stay tuned!

    By Blogger SS, at 22:33  

  • @r-f: forget about me. Just read the media and decide for yourself, with both eyes open. This is one captain who hides behind his coach and selection committe..and decides things behind everyone's back. He may be a great batsman..but a captain for team India? Not exactly.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:35  

  • @ss

    i am very much in tune i think you have some serious problem with your head and you need immediate medical attention.

    Cuz i am not sure how you can miss the terrific display of the indian of late (post SG era). Even after looking at that you think GC is pulling down the indian cricket then GOD help you.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:37  

  • @rahul-fan,
    I guess you have serious vision problem!! You are not reading what I am posting, but spreading your pent up words at some excuse. Good luck with your worship.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:39  

  • This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:40  

  • @SS

    about GC intial comments on SRT. I think he was right in saying that he felt SRT may no longer be the SRT of the old. But then he is tryin to make him play like the sachin of the old, havent you seen the first 2 ODI's agaisnt SL.

    I think GC had a lot in that change in attitude for SRT.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:41  

  • ...regarding the terrific display..don't you think it is too much to ascribe it to GC? Had he been a great coach, he might have proved himself elsewhere. The set of players were chosen and brought up by SG ( ..well excpet for Sreesanth etc)..do not make it like GC bred them.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:41  

  • @r-f, On SRT. Just see what he is doing. On the average he is performaing at same level as in last 2-3 years. Some good matches.then a string of poor scores..and again some good ones. No question about his class, but GC is trying to make everyone believe that he has turned Sachin around. I must say he is successful in making some people fool for some time. He won't be able to do that for all the time. Hope you stay tuned and find out in the next 12-14 months how great he is!!!

    By Blogger SS, at 22:44  

  • SS

    you talk as if SG hand picked the men who are now playing for india. It is the selectors who must be patted for spoting Yuvi and co. Even though there are times when the selectors act responsible.....there are also time when they are good.

    LIke persisting with Yuvi and Kaif and the sacking of SG

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:44  

  • southie_joker:
    Look this Dravidian argument is not going to get you anywhere. I personally do not care. You might have seen my posts on this blog.

    Most of it SG has brought it upon himself via performance and made a fool of himself in front of the whole world by making his spat with the coach public. So for most part he has himself to blame for not playing it smart.

    There is no doubt that under SG Indian Cricket has scripted some famous wins 01 Kolkata, 03 Adeladie, 02 Port of spain, 02 Natwest win come to mind. If you look at these wins it is guys like VVS/RD/SRT/HS and YS/MK in the Natwest final that contributed to it. But that said 10 years from now when they put these wins under perspective it will always be under SG's name. So in other words no one can take that away from him, no matter how hard they try. So for you to say that some of these same guys who helped him script these wins have conspired to take him down is inappropriate. Also SG's place in the annals of Indian cricket is in tact even if he does not score a single run from here on.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 22:44  

  • SS

    I am pretty sure that if he gets the right support from the administration then INDIA will end up being a better team then it was under the SG-JW era. Please stay tuned.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:46  

  • @RF,
    It is well known that SG has backed a lot of young people and also stood beside older players in times of crisis. It is all written and consumed. He had the guts or foolishness to go ahead and speak his mind. To that extent, he was different from all other Indian captains.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:47  

  • Rams

    well said about SG.

    All that he shouldnt try to do is try to comeback when he infact is not ready and make a fool of himself and the country.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:48  

  • @RF..better than SG/JW??

    Not so fast! SG started when IND cricket was at its bottom after thourough drubbing by AUS, and during match fixing scandal. They brought up a team that won matches all over the world and consistently, of course loosing a lot on the way. But the main character of the IND team has changed. To build on the base create by JW/SG is one thing, but to say that GC can do better than them...it's a long stretch.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:50  

  • @SS

    well you atleast accept that SG is foolish in some ways.

    All i am saying is GC is good for indian cricket but he should be given full backing by the admistration and lets see where we end up in 14 months like you say.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:51  

  • @rams,
    I agree that this is not time for SG to come back and not sure whether he can come back. Unfirtunately, of late, there is this wave of hate mongering that basically is trying to wipe off 5 years from IND cricket. That is pure balony!!

    By Blogger SS, at 22:53  

  • SS
    whats wrong in saying the current lot will do better than SG-JW.

    The core may be the same but with right guidance there is every chance this group can surpass the hights reached by them when they were at their best.

    No body is discounting the fact that SG has done well when indian cricket was in the doldrums after the fixing scandal. But thats past and we have to look forward and move ahead not gorge on the past.

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:54  

  • @RF, yes : SG is foolish by RD standard. The RD standard being hide under the boss and suck up so that my own chair remains in tact. I reain the nice guy who soehow became first!!!!

    By Blogger SS, at 22:55  

  • ss:
    No doubt SG had done well as a captain. But having said that he had VVS/RD at their peak and Sachin for most part was Sachin. That helps a lot. Take a look at the scoresheets of the famous wins under SG these gents I metioned above almost appear with good results on almost all of them. No doubt SG deserves credit too for laying out tactics and making bold moves at times.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 22:57  

  • @SS

    well gotta go now bud.

    But you have to stop livin in the past and think for the future.

    good night!

    By Blogger rahul_fan, at 22:57  

  • @RF,
    I have problem in accepting the greatness of GC based on some fickle wins against an out of form SL or depleted SA in India. And when you put in perspective the amount of politicking he has done within this short time, any cricket lover can see where he is going.

    By Blogger SS, at 22:58  

  • I agree with SS. The Jury is not out yet on the RD/GC combine yet. Need to wait atleast to the conclusion of the Ind/pak series for sampling.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 23:01  

  • @rams,
    Without argument a captain is as good as his team. But at the same time, a good captain builds the team also. Players performed and SG provided a stable backing. So many young players came up during his era...all is there for record.

    The problem is with the politics that killed him.

    By Blogger SS, at 23:01  

  • ..off to bed folks. tomorrow is a short day. And after that : Turkey!!!!

    By Blogger SS, at 23:04  

  • ss:
    No denying your last post.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 23:04  

  • good night everyone.

    By Blogger ramshorns, at 23:04  

  • Another blot against SRT's career


    By Blogger squarecut, at 23:07  

  • squarecut, fair enough...It will be interesting to see the analysis If you filter that analysis of poor 4th innings average by
    1)Did the team require a big total to win in 4th innings at all ? ie. > 250/300....
    2)Usually SRTs scores are low or high. which teams have the lows been ?

    By Blogger greg2rescue, at 23:56  

  • looking at it again i really like the BP XI selection...
    good mix of talents you could spot...all these guys impressed in some way or the other...In my opin ion, Dhawan is a sure shot for ODIs and tests in future. Jadav looks good for a test spot. Heard a lot about Gagandeep Singh & Amit mishra as well...

    are they showing this match on tv ?

    By Blogger greg2rescue, at 00:05  

  • Bengal Vs. Maharashtra. Bengal won the toss and elected to Field !!!

    By Blogger Schumi, at 00:08  

  • rahul fan:

    rather late in the day but couple of points --

    I did not say I FEEL -- you are putting words (text) in my mouth (post). Like I said, it is okay for you to have your opinion, and I am fine with that, just don't trump it around as fact. Also, please let me decide on what I feel / believe rather than you summarizing my thoughts for me.

    You may interpret mahendra's statement as opinion, but when the board president states something in an official capacity and in an official press conference (which happened to be the only press conference), it is meant to be the committee's finding rather than the personal opinion of mahendra. For your perusal, I am presenting Mahendra's actual quote after the meeting:
    "Some of the points, particularly with regards to injury, the captain Sourav faking injury etc, after hearing the concerned people, the committee came to the conclusion that whatever has been said is far from the truth," Mahendra said.

    And finally, my point about playing cricket was not to suggest that you have or have not played cricket. It was made in the context of an argument, namely that I have played when my team was faltering and my teammates (including the captain) were concerned about our batting, but on these occasions, I do not recall us feeling nervous or less secure just because the mood in our camp was one of concern as opposed to confidence. We (other players as well as I) knew what we had to do --negotiate the ball when we went out to bat -sometimes we succeeded, sometimes not, but did not feel under any greater or lesser pressure because other teammates in the pavilion were concerned / nervous etc. the pressure arose from the match situation, not what had happened in the pavilion before I came out to bat.

    By Blogger kban1, at 00:21  

  • worma,

    how come no thread for Eng-Pak live action??

    By Blogger suraj, at 01:14  

  • suraj: thread is there, now. Dude I'm on GMT+2...so kind of difficult to open a thread then ;-)

    By Blogger worma, at 03:20  

Post a Comment

<< Home