On Sunday, July 15, 2012 6:21:50 PM UTC+5:30, Mike Holmans wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Jul 2012 07:18:04 -0700 (PDT), Vijay Sharma
> <viz.nirvanam.sha...@gmail.com> tapped the keyboard and brought forth:
> >On Friday, July 13, 2012 11:17:03 PM UTC+5:30, Mike Holmans wrote:
> >> To take a particular example, how often have Bangladesh undertaken a
> >> Test tour of India since India pushed so hard for their premature
> >> elevation to Full Membership of ICC? Getting the Bangles vote in the
> >> councils of the ICC was obviously important to the BCCI, but
> >> fulfilling the concomitant responsibility of getting them to be
> >> competitive internationally isn&#39;t a concern of the BCCI, apparently,
> >> unless they can make oodles of money while doing it.
> >
> >I don't think playing a Test series in India versus Bangles is going to solve the problem of Test cricket.
> >
> >Politics is something that one needs to accept if they want to live in a democratic environment.
> I'm not suggesting that the world would suddenly be all sweetness and
> light if the Bangles toured India.
> But the ICC said that every country should be playing against every
> other country home and away, and the BCCI have effectively added their
> own rider "unless we don't want to".
Why did the other 9 members agree to it then? And I am not sure if BCCI is solely responsible for that rider
> Far from accepting that the ICC are making decisions for the benefit
> of the sport as a whole and going along with things they don't
> necessarily like for the greater good, the BCCI treats ICC decisions
> as vague pieces of advice which they'll go along with as and when it's
> convenient, if they do so at all.
I think all the powerful boards do that...in fact even the not-so-powerful boards also do it. Two wrongs don't make a right kind of arguments don't matter here because there is no "wrong" being done.
> I'm sure some rational justification can be found for any individual
> case, but it's the general impression of the BCCI deciding that ICC
> decisions are advisory rather than binding on the ICC members that
> gets everyone else's back up. You're keen on specific examples, but
> it's not any one decision that matters: it's the general impression
> created.
I am afraid that is something both BCCI and the other boards will have to learn to live with. When power is accumulated at one place then such feelings are natural
> Support the BCCI's right to do whatever it thinks best for India and
> hang everyone else if you like, but don't expect people from elsewhere
> to have any respect for the BCCI while they carry on in that fashion.
I think all of us want the game to flourish...we don't agree on the details
> And expect people in the cricket world to equate "BCCI" and "India",
OK, context makes it fine
> and for people to talk of "India" being bully-boys or being selfish
> turds without necessarily being anti-Indian on some kind of racist
> level.
Everybody is selfish and there are no two ways about it...just that right now BCCI is more powerful than the other boards and they are being perceived to be more selfish than others.
I always believe that power is a "given" trait and hence can be taken away too. Strength is inherent and BCCI's focus should be on becoming strong not just powerful. If BCCI is powerful today it will lose its power tomorrow. What happened to ECB and CA will happen to BCCI too.
I'd like BCCI to focus on its strength - Indian cricket. As long as Indian cricket remains strong and there is a market for cricket in India, BCCI will be strong and grow powerful. Other boards make BCCI powerful and they can make BCCI lose its power on them.
The reality is that equilibrium will be maintained somehow or the other - some boards will always be more powerful than others. I don't think human systems are built for equality for all. It is something we need to learn to accept and live with.
Having said that I am definitely not suggesting that we sit quiet when power is being abused by someone. Like I said, power is given and can be taken away. Power was given to TCCB and ACB and was taken away from them. When BCCI becomes too abusive its power will be taken away. It is a very natural and repeatable process.
Right now I don't think BCCI is as abusive as people are making them out to be. Like you said it, rational justifications can be found for every single case where BCCI has been alleged to have abused its power. It doesn't mean I will accept those justifications as valid. For ex, their stance on not using DRS at all is pig-headed. But that is not power abuse. I think we disagree here.
On Sunday, July 15, 2012 10:48:22 AM UTC+9, cricketrulez wrote:
> On Jul 14, 3:56 am, patty...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Two wrongs ...
> 1) Its the don't make the mistake I made line. It works only when the
> entity saying that has no conflict of interest and doesn't stand to
> gain from it.
It's not "the don"t make the same mistake I made line". I'm the entity saying it, I didn't make a mistake and I don't stand to gain from it.
> 2) Wrong? That implies a sense of entitlement. As Bharat pointed out
> BCCI primary responsibilty is to indan cricket and indian cricketers.
> They come first, even if its at the cost of international cricket in
> country A or B or C
Perhaps so, but if the BCCI acts to the detriment of cricket as a whole then the other boards should grow a pair and sanction them. (never happen because most of them are craven lickspittles to the BCCI and their money). For example after the Sydney affair when Indian threatened to abandon the tour, Cricket Australia should have said, "OK, fuck off and never come back".
> > So the final nail? Mercy killing?
> If the a sport can't survive
> withe enormous amount of resources and wealth BCCI has spread around
> int he past decade, then yeah, it can rot and go away for all I care.
So you don't like cricket, why are you posting in a cricket group?
> > But not cricket
> Some times it is a zero sum game. get on with it.
> > So it's just life that the ultimate form of the game is weakened, and that's not bad for the game? Wow.
> I don't get how a league which lasts all of six weeks during a time
> when no test cricket is possible in most countries due to weather can
> weaken it.
> SO how exactly does IPL weaken test cricket?
"It also takes quite an ego for Pietersen to allow his representatives to float an alternative suggestion that he will make himself available for England's one-day fixtures if he is allowed to fulfil the whole of his $2m (£1.3m) IPL contract with Delhi Daredevils next season and skip England's May Tests against New Zealand in the process".
http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/572662.html
> It's not "the don"t make the same mistake I made line". I'm the entity saying it, I didn't make a mistake and I don't stand to gain from it.
I'm sure its just coincidence that ECB, CA would play the same line.
> Perhaps so,
Its that sense of entitlement which makes even reasonable indian fan
to act out.
> but if the BCCI acts to the detriment of cricket as a whole then the other boards should grow a pair and >sanction them. >(never happen because most of them are craven lickspittles to the BCCI and their money).
And don't you forget it. What this also means is Aus and Eng boards
aren't exactly acting in the best interest of cricket. So Zip it with
henon stop BCCI bashing
>For example after the Sydney affair when Indian threatened to abandon the tour, Cricket Australia should have said, >"OK, fuck off and never come back".
Regarding Sydney, BCCI raped CA, pup, haydos and gilly properly at the
second hearing. And we all knwo how symo ended up. Fuckwit should have
had his head cracked open by bhajji. I would have.
Ona separate note, If something as trivial as that from 4 years ago
riles you up, imagine what BCCI and indian fans must feel from all
that BS Aus and England pulled fro decades
> So you don't like cricket, why are you posting in a cricket group?
I like cricket just fine. I believe the sport will do just fine. If it
means that NZ, SL, Pak and WI test players have to make a shit living
so be it.
> "It also takes quite an ego for Pietersen to allow his representatives to float an alternative suggestion that he will make >himself available for England's one-day fixtures if he is allowed to fulfil the whole of his $2m (£1.3m) IPL contract with >Delhi Daredevils next season and skip England's May Tests against New Zealand in the >process".http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/572662.html
don't blame IPL for poor player management skills of ECB. ECB was
stupid enough hire a mercenary to represent their country. If they
have a pair, they wil deny NOC for the kolpak. if they don't have bal
to take on KP, good luck taking on BCCI.
On Wednesday, July 18, 2012 11:01:04 AM UTC+9, cricketrulez wrote:
> On Jul 17, 8:17 am, patty...@gmail.com wrote:
> > It's not "the don"t make the same mistake I made line". I'm the entity saying it, I didn't make a mistake and I don't stand to gain from it.
> I'm sure its just coincidence that ECB, CA would play the same line.
And we're back to two wrongs don't make a right.
And yeah it would be a coincidence unless you think I'm somehow involved with a national cricket board. Although I did ring Jack Clarke and James Sutherland before I posted and asked if they agreed with my post.
Looney
> > Perhaps so,
> Its that sense of entitlement which makes even reasonable indian fan
> to act out.
What sense of entitlement are you talking about. This is where news groups are inferior to the web. On the web I would just use an emoticon showing that you are a looney.
> > but if the BCCI acts to the detriment of cricket as a whole then the other boards should grow a pair and >sanction them. >(never happen because most of them are craven lickspittles to the BCCI and their money).
> And don't you forget it. What this also means is Aus and Eng boards
> aren't exactly acting in the best interest of cricket. So Zip it with
> henon stop BCCI bashing
Zip it with the putting words into other peoples mouths.
I hadn't even mentioned the BCCI until the previous post, and that post I was obviously of the opinion that the other boards were not acting in the interest of cricket by pandering to the BCCI.
> >For example after the Sydney affair when Indian threatened to abandon the tour, Cricket Australia should have said, >"OK, fuck off and never come back".
> Regarding Sydney, BCCI raped CA, pup, haydos and gilly properly at the
> second hearing. And we all knwo how symo ended up. Fuckwit should have
> had his head cracked open by bhajji. I would have.
So how you are supporting racism and violence, and trivialising sexual assault, showing your true colours, you disgusting excuse.
By the by have you seen Andrew Symonds? He would've snapped Bhaji in half like a twig.
> Ona separate note, If something as trivial as that from 4 years ago
> riles you up, imagine what BCCI and indian fans must feel from all
> that BS Aus and England pulled fro decades
Umm you do know what "For example" means don't you? And blatant covering up of racism and threatening to call off a tour if you don't get your own way is trivial? Again showing your true colours. (Plus two wrongs and everything).
> > So you don't like cricket, why are you posting in a cricket group?
> I like cricket just fine. I believe the sport will do just fine. If it
> means that NZ, SL, Pak and WI test players have to make a shit living
> so be it.
Nice attitude. And if you do like cricket why do all your posts scream otherwise.
> > "It also takes quite an ego for Pietersen to allow his representatives to float an alternative suggestion that he will make >himself available for England's one-day fixtures if he is allowed to fulfil the whole of his $2m (£1.3m) IPL contract with >Delhi Daredevils next season and skip England's May Tests against New Zealand in the >process".http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine/content/current/story/572662.html
> don't blame IPL for poor player management skills of ECB. ECB was
> stupid enough hire a mercenary to represent their country. If they
> have a pair, they wil deny NOC for the kolpak. if they don't have bal
> to take on KP, good luck taking on BCCI.
And the IPL isn't complicit at all? You asked how IPL could hurt Test cricket, I gave you an example. When a cricketer as talented as Pietersen is tempted to play a retarded cross between baseball and cricket rather than play tests then IPL is obviously and clearly bad for cricket. Unless of course you are a blind looney.
> What sense of entitlement are you talking about. This is where news groups are inferior to the web. On the web I would >just use an emoticon showing that you are a looney.
sure, thats the ticket, bat shit crazy sheila.
> Zip it with the putting words into other peoples mouths.
> I hadn't even mentioned the BCCI until the previous post, and that post I was obviously of the opinion that the other boards were not acting in the interest of cricket by pandering to the BCCI.
What do you this whole thread has been about? Non stop whining about
how BCCI is kiling cricket all the while crkcet reamins a viable sport
thanks to BCCI funds. So ZIP it bat shit crazy sheila.
> So how you are supporting racism and violence, and trivialising sexual assault, showing your true colours, you disgusting >excuse.
Oh boohoo, if there was clear evidence, why did those lying pieces of
born again Christian garbage hayden, pussy ass pup and cheat gilly
change their story in front of the judge? Why exactly were those
scumbags considered more crdible than bhajji and SRT?
> By the by have you seen Andrew Symonds? He would've snapped Bhaji in half like a twig.
I'm sure after a week in the hospital for a concussion from the blow
from the bat maybe.
> Umm you do know what "For example" means don't you? And blatant covering up of racism and threatening to call off a >tour if you don't get your own way is trivial? Again showing your true colours. (Plus two wrongs and everything).
Pot, kettle and all that .....
> Nice attitude. And if you do like cricket why do all your posts scream otherwise.
Here we go again with the holier than thou attitude.
> And the IPL isn't complicit at all? You asked how IPL could hurt Test cricket, I gave you an example. When a cricketer >as talented as Pietersen is tempted to play a retarded cross between baseball and cricket rather than play tests then IPL >is obviously and clearly bad for cricket. Unless of course you are a blind looney.
Nope, IPL has clear defined rules about who will be allowed to play
and under what conditions. Sudden retirement from test cricket to play
in IPL has already been ruled out with the clear stament that such
players would either need to sit out two years or need NOC from the
home board. time for ECB to make an example of KP for the sake of Test
cricket. i.e., if the inventors of the game really do care of the
"purest" form of it, batshit crazy looney
