Worst Behaved Cricket Crowds
Chan Fonseka
worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed. Well, if not the
absolute worst they have done their notoriety no harm at all by this
recent performance against New Zealand.
And we are led to believe on this newsgroup that there is nothing the
Aussie crowds respect more than the opponents giving them a thrashing.
What crap.
- Chan [not too surprised at the deafening silence (or maybe it's just
my newsfeed) regarding the Melbourne crowd behaviour by Aussie
posters. Now if this had been Guyana ...]
Will Sutton
"Chan Fonseka" <chan.f...@oracle.com> wrote in message
news:a20249e0.02011...@posting.google.com...
> In a recent posting my opinion that Australian crowds were the
> worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed. Well, if not the
> absolute worst they have done their notoriety no harm at all by this
> recent performance against New Zealand.
>
> And we are led to believe on this newsgroup that there is nothing the
> Aussie crowds respect more than the opponents giving them a thrashing.
> What crap.
Well when we start burning stands down and start having riots then I will
accept that we have the worse crowds but until then
Yuk Tang
> worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed. Well, if not the
> absolute worst they have done their notoriety no harm at all by this
> recent performance against New Zealand.
Pakistani fans living in Britain would give them a run for their money.
Cheers, ymt.
Matthew van de Werken
I'd agree with most of this, except that at the point that the crowd was
misbehaving, Australia was well in front. Not excusing or anything like
that, just pointing it out. The crowd was an embarrassment - hopefully the
rest of the crowds can show how to behave.
Cheers,
MvdW
Michael Seth
Chan Fonseka wrote:
> And we are led to believe on this newsgroup that there is nothing the
> Aussie crowds respect more than the opponents giving them a thrashing.
> What crap.
I wouldn't have put it that way. I would say it was more that there
is nothing that Aussie cricket followers respect more than an
opponent who plays top class cricket against their side. The
beer soaked rabble element don't tend to be happy when
their side gets beaten.
Michael [Who thinks the Aussies might have been wanting to
get one back for Eden Park a few years ago]
Louis Fourier
Or Calcutta...
Fourier
John P Darcy
> - Chan [not too surprised at the deafening silence (or maybe it's just
> my newsfeed) regarding the Melbourne crowd behaviour by Aussie
> posters. Now if this had been Guyana ...]
As mentioned in another thread somewhere, I was working and did not see
most of the game. I may get to see something on the TV news today. If
the crowd at Melbourne has indeed acted in a way that would endanger the
players or other spectators, then the offenders should be prosecuted to
the full extent of the law.
Unfortunately - and this poitn was made very early int he match on the
radio - this particular HitandGiggle Trophy is sponsored by BEER. Thank
God I will be able to hide in the relative calm of the Members' Stand
for the SCG matches.
--
Cheers
John
Guy Fawkes
<jim.l...@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote:
>
>Pakistani fans living in Britain would give them a run for their money.
>
Interesting turn of phrase there. The Aussies would sort out any
mugger I'm sure.
Jon
"Chan Fonseka" <chan.f...@oracle.com> wrote in message
news:a20249e0.02011...@posting.google.com...
> In a recent posting my opinion that Australian crowds were the
> worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed.
The affable, polite Murali was no-balled for throwing - generally speaking
Australian crowds aren't overly fond of cheats.
Cheers,
Jon
Prasenjit Mitra
unless they come from a certain country, right? It is quite okay to claim
bumped catches, to not walk and bat on to snatch victory from the hands of
defeat against Pak, and that is not cheating, but bowling a no-ball, the
guy is a confirmed cheat! So should it read, generally speaking
Aussie crowds aren't overly fond of bowlers?
-PM
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jon
>
>
>
>
Blair Trewin
> Unfortunately - and this poitn was made very early int he match on the
> radio - this particular HitandGiggle Trophy is sponsored by BEER. Thank
> God I will be able to hide in the relative calm of the Members' Stand
> for the SCG matches.
...which is why the ACB won't do anything meaningful about it - but I
presume the relevant authorities have the right to suspend the MCG's
liquor licence if there's a threat to public order. (It can't be too
difficult to smuggle grog in - I saw a discarded 1/4-full bottle of
vodka in the toilets after the game).
The state of the match wasn't terribly important to what was happening
- I doubt if too many of the residents of the zoo (the trouble, as
always, was almost entirely confined to one small section of the
ground) would have been able to tell you what the state of the match
was. Damien Martyn's dismissal went almost totally unnoticed by them.
For some reason this always seems to happen in the first Melbourne ODI
of the summer, and not thereafter (originally this used to be
attributed to the start of school/university holidays, but it still
happens now when the first ODI's in January rather than December). It
must make life easy for the journalists - they can write 95% of their
story in advance and only need to slot in the exact number of
arrests/ejections, the name of the opposition, the over in which the
interruption takes place and the name of the police spokesperson.
Blair Trewin
Larry de Silva
"Will Sutton" <muta...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6oI%7.6714$je.2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
You wont have to wait long at the rate they are going dude.
Larrikin
>
>
Larry de Silva
"Yuk Tang" <jim.l...@nospambtopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:a1nlt1$jde$1...@knossos.btinternet.com...
But aren't they all supposed to be British citizens??
Larrikin
>
> Cheers, ymt.
>
>
>
Larry de Silva
"Jon" <dinga...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:CJL%7.1753$N31....@ozemail.com.au...
> Hi,
>
> "Chan Fonseka" <chan.f...@oracle.com> wrote in message
> news:a20249e0.02011...@posting.google.com...
> > In a recent posting my opinion that Australian crowds were the
> > worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> > against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed.
>
> The affable, polite Murali was no-balled for throwing
Mistakenly in retrospect.
>- generally speaking
> Australian crowds aren't overly fond of cheats.
Except the great Ned Kelly (cheating murderer) of
course.................................
But leaving that aside, why was Murali a cheat when his action was later
cleared??
Larrikin
>
> Cheers,
>
> Jon
>
>
Moby
> In a recent posting my opinion that Australian crowds were the
> worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed.
You living in Victoria now?
I'd expect this sort of generalisation of Victoria as the entirety of
Australia in Victoria, but I'm sure you're a USian.
But any chance to sticke the boot into the whole country, hey?
Moby.
AamirW
Oh, you must be talking about the British citizens of Pakistani
descent, who were celebrating the cordial race relations in Britian,
during the one day series goig on there last year.
Aamir Waheed
Will Sutton
"Larry de Silva" <larryd...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:dmN%7.1792$N31....@ozemail.com.au...
FWIW concrete doesn't burn that well Larry
Larry de Silva
Try the old wooden bench seats at the MCG sometime dude!!
It will remind you of a few of your old hot flames :-)
Sit on them for a couple of days and you get this burning
desire........................................!!!
Larrikin
>
>
Paul Robson
<dinga...@hotmail.com> writes:
>The affable, polite Murali was no-balled for throwing - generally speaking
>Australian crowds aren't overly fond of cheats.
And they are stupid enough apparently to believe what their
"newspapers" tell them.
Adam
the groung couse the crowd light it on fire, On the boundry line they have
the army with machine guns and to watch the cricket it has to been seen
through barbed wire 10 foot high fences, compare it to austrlia where there
is no barbed wire fencing seeting and unarmed security guead with a few
coppers
Mike Holmans
Don't be ridiculous. Do you spend your time making distinctions about
whether or not they're more likely to set the stand on fire in
Calcutta or Bombay, or do you make remarks about "India" or "Indians",
when there are something like 50 times as many Indians in India as
Australians in Australia, in an area not that different in size? I
must have missed your analyses of how the crowds at Chepauk differ
from those at Eden Gardens and the Wankhede. Or your penetrating
dissection of the differences between crowds at The Oval and
Headingley. And how the Bajan crowds differ from the Trinis.
You're obsessed with the regional differences in Australia. Don't
assume the rest of us are.
Cheers,
Mike
Jon
"Prasenjit Mitra" <pra...@Sole.Stanford.EDU> wrote in message
news:Pine.GSO.3.94.102011...@Sole.Stanford.EDU...
I'm not sure exactly what you are referring to with regards to the bumped
catches, not walking and batting on to "snatch" victory, so could you please
elaborate on that.
Yes, being no-balled for throwing is tantamount to cheating, and I think
you'll find that's why the nasty Australian crowds gave the friendly,
affable, Murali a hard time.
Sincerely,
Jon
Jon
"Larry de Silva" <larryd...@ozemail.com.au> wrote in message
news:jrN%7.1795$N31....@ozemail.com.au...
>
> "Jon" <dinga...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:CJL%7.1753$N31....@ozemail.com.au...
> > Hi,
> >
> > "Chan Fonseka" <chan.f...@oracle.com> wrote in message
> > news:a20249e0.02011...@posting.google.com...
> > > In a recent posting my opinion that Australian crowds were the
> > > worst-behaved in the world (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> > > against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed.
> >
> > The affable, polite Murali was no-balled for throwing
>
> Mistakenly in retrospect.
No - see below.
> >- generally speaking
> > Australian crowds aren't overly fond of cheats.
>
> Except the great Ned Kelly (cheating murderer) of
> course.................................
What are you on about?
> But leaving that aside, why was Murali a cheat when his action was later
> cleared??
His action was later cleared in laboratory tests done by an "independent"
analyst chosen by the BCCSL, I believe. These tests proved only that
Muralitharan did not throw whilst in the company of the good doctor whom was
examining him. They were conducted in conditions entirely alien to that
which occur in the centre, and they most certainly could not prove "in
retrospect" that Muralitharan did not throw during that fateful test match.
Muralitharan threw the ball whilst bowling, and was subsequently called for
throwing - it is, my friend, that simple. As I mentioned in another post -
throwing _is_ cheating.
Sincerely,
Jon
Jon
"Paul Robson" <auti...@aol.com.leechux> wrote in message
news:20020112062757...@mb-dd.aol.com...
What are you on about?
Sincerely,
Jon
Moby
I think the -main- reason behind it is that I really, really, don't
appreciate being tarred with the same brush as my Victorian cousins.
We've done our best to behave, but our beer gets progressively weaker and
more expensive due to the bad behaviour of people we have no control over.
It's not because it affects Qld players, its not because it affects the
Qld economy, it's because it affects when and where I can get a good beer
and how much I have to pay for it.
There are different people who go to the different grounds and it's not
fair to blame the people who behave themselves.
Moby.
linus
"Adam" <adam...@froggy.com.au> wrote in message
news:3c404...@mercury.planet.net.au...
but to my knowledge, there are no 10 foot high fences in any cricket venue
in Sri Lanka. And when did Sri Lankan cricket spectators burn anything
other than cigarettes on a cricket ground?
Another ignorant poster from a "so called" developed country displaying his
inablity to see beyond his nose.
Larry de Silva
"Paul Robson" <auti...@aol.com.leechux> wrote in message
news:20020112062757...@mb-dd.aol.com...
Especially Conn &
Craddock.............................................................LOL!!!
What utter gullibility.
Larrikin
Larry de Silva
You choose to ignore all the medical evidence & the results of all the
vigorous testing Murali underwent to prove his innocence. You aren't related
to Mad Hamish by any chance are you? You BOTH ignore the very same areas my
friend. It is that simple. Murali does not chuck while bowling.
Larrikin
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jon
>
>
Larry de Silva
So please do tell me Adam Ant, when was the last fire lit in a Sri Lankan
game in SL dude? You seem to have more knowledge of this than me! Come on,
enlighten me??
Larrikin
The Wog
> worst-behaved in the world
And you discredit your own opinion by mentioning Guyana in this post.
> (referencing their deplorable behaviour
> against the affable, polite Murali) was pooh-poohed.
And rightly so. The behaviour of the Melb crowd is consistently substandard
and warranting further intervention and tougher penalties. But nowhere near
world's worst practice.
> Well, if not the
> absolute worst they have done their notoriety no harm at all by this
> recent performance against New Zealand.
I might also note in passing that Melbourne does not represent the whole of
Australia - I can't remember the last time a Sydney crowd stopped the same
for half an hour in that disgraceful manner.
>
> And we are led to believe on this newsgroup that there is nothing the
> Aussie crowds respect more than the opponents giving them a thrashing.
> What crap.
Of course that's crap. What we respect most is an opponent going down
fighting in honourable defeat (or at least well fought draw). We quite liked
the Kiwis making a game of the Bris test (albeit through a sporting
declaration), and we didn't even mind the good finish in Perth. But we
didn't enjoy seeing AUS actually LOSE the first ODI!
>
> - Chan [not too surprised at the deafening silence (or maybe it's just
> my newsfeed) regarding the Melbourne crowd behaviour by Aussie
> posters.
Well shit, the match finished at 10:30pm AEST. You posted 6:23am AEST the
next day. I'm sorry I didn't set my alarm for 5am Saturday to post my
condemnation of the Melbourne crowd's stupid behaviour. You dickhead.
Better late than never - that behaviour was f*ing stupid, there is no excuse
for it, and the ACB, MCC and Vic Police should get together to toughen crowd
control.
Now if this had been Guyana ...]
If this had been Guyana,
a) Players lives would have been under threat, because the missiles would
have been bricks rather than empty plastic bottles and one lemon, and
b) I still wouldn't have been up at 6:23am to say what I thought of it.
Wog
Shaun Press
<snip waste of bandwidth that bottom-posting fascists would do better to concerntrate on>
> FWIW concrete doesn't burn that well Larry
>
Proved by repeated tests at Eden Gardens
gmurthy
Jon wrote:
> > But leaving that aside, why was Murali a cheat when his action was later
> > cleared??
>
> His action was later cleared in laboratory tests done by an "independent"
> analyst chosen by the BCCSL, I believe. These tests proved only that
> Muralitharan did not throw whilst in the company of the good doctor whom was
> examining him. They were conducted in conditions entirely alien to that
> which occur in the centre, and they most certainly could not prove "in
> retrospect" that Muralitharan did not throw during that fateful test match.
> Muralitharan threw the ball whilst bowling, and was subsequently called for
> throwing - it is, my friend, that simple. As I mentioned in another post -
> throwing _is_ cheating.
You say "Muralitharan threw the ball whilst bowling" etc. Just as you say
that lab tests don't prove Murali didn't throw, how do you *prove* that
Murali did? It is (at best) the opinion of an umpire, not proof or gospel
cast in stone that Murali does throw. Further you say "throwing is cheating".
Now that is so only if a a bowler *knowlingly* throws when bowling, not
when he himself does not know. And prior to this it must first of all be
proved that Murali does throw that odd ball, something which at present is
conjecture, supported by the opinion of a couple of aussie umpires, thats
all. You mention that Murali throws (and cheats) in such a way as if the
opinion (of aussie a couple of aussie umpires and some other folks) beneath
which you seek shelter is a proof in and of itself.
-Ganesh
>
>
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Jon
Larry de Silva
"gmurthy" <gmu...@cisco.com> wrote in message
news:3C416523...@cisco.com...
Excellent post Ganesh.
Larrikin
>
> >
>
> >
> >
> > Sincerely,
> >
> > Jon
>
Karuval
Like you barking for Sin Lanka.
>
> Larrikin
>
> >
> > Cheers, ymt.
> >
> >
> >
Karuval
Sri Lankans as a nature are pyromaniacs.
>
> Larrikin
Gireesh Bhat
A thief is a thief, no matter matter how big the robbery.
:)
Gireesh
"Will Sutton" <muta...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6oI%7.6714$je.2...@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
Jayen
> the groung couse the crowd light it on fire,
Eh?
> On the boundry line they have
> the army with machine guns and to watch the cricket it has to been seen
> through barbed wire 10 foot high fences, compare it to austrlia where there
> is no barbed wire fencing seeting and unarmed security guead with a few
> coppers
The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but the
consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect them
from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked among
some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far away
(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
Similarly, you might have found all this during the recent England
tour, which would have had something to do with September 11 and the
stand the English government took against the Taliban.
All this is not to offer excuses for Eden Gardens 1996, but just
pointing out that apart from our local pests, we have some rather
unwelcome neighbours dropping in and having a go at our guests. Our
problems go beyond beer-sodden drunks. The barbed wire and 10 foot
high fences are not always a reflection on the locals.
Regards,
Jayen
Mad Hamish
>"Adam" <adam...@froggy.com.au> wrote in message news:<3c404...@mercury.planet.net.au>...
>> what about india or sl where the they don't even bother putting seating in
>> the groung couse the crowd light it on fire,
>
>Eh?
>
>> On the boundry line they have
>> the army with machine guns and to watch the cricket it has to been seen
>> through barbed wire 10 foot high fences, compare it to austrlia where there
>> is no barbed wire fencing seeting and unarmed security guead with a few
>> coppers
>
>The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but the
>consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect them
>from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked among
>some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far away
>(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
So what, the fences around the cricket grounds in India are to defend
the Indian crowd from the people on the field?
--
"Hope is replace by fear and dreams by survival, most of us get by."
Stuart Adamson 1958-2001
Mad Hamish
Hamish Laws
h_l...@bigpond.com
Gafoor
news:3c43b5d0...@news.bigpond.com...
Read Jayen's post again. Maybe you will get the meaning this.
I do not neccessarily agree with what he is saying, but basically
you don't get what he means.
Jayen
> On 14 Jan 2002 20:32:53 -0800, rsc_p...@yahoo.com (Jayen) wrote:
>
> >"Adam" <adam...@froggy.com.au> wrote in message news:<3c404...@mercury.planet.net.au>...
> >> what about india or sl where the they don't even bother putting seating in
> >> the groung couse the crowd light it on fire,
> >
> >Eh?
> >
> >> On the boundry line they have
> >> the army with machine guns and to watch the cricket it has to been seen
> >> through barbed wire 10 foot high fences, compare it to austrlia where there
> >> is no barbed wire fencing seeting and unarmed security guead with a few
> >> coppers
> >
> >The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but the
> >consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect them
> >from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked among
> >some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far away
> >(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
>
> So what, the fences around the cricket grounds in India are to defend
> the Indian crowd from the people on the field?
The fences are ALSO for protecting the people on the field from their
"friends" from other parts of the world who have dropped in to say
hello. Topical example: Englishmen and Taliban.
As for how much of the threat is from mis-behaving local guys and how
much is from threatening "furriners", work out your own percentages. I
haven't the faintest idea.
Regards,
Jayen
Mad Hamish
wrote:
So the fences around the playing areas are to stop foreign terrorists?
A chain link fence with barbed wire is not going to stop a serious
attack.
Gafoor
> >> >The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but
the
> >> >consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect
> >them
> >> >from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked
> >among
> >> >some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far
away
> >> >(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
> >>
> >> So what, the fences around the cricket grounds in India are to
> >defend
> >> the Indian crowd from the people on the field?
> >
> >Read Jayen's post again. Maybe you will get the meaning this.
> >I do not neccessarily agree with what he is saying, but basically
> >you don't get what he means.
> >
> So the fences around the playing areas are to stop foreign
terrorists?
As I said, I do not neccessarily agree with what he is saying.
I was just pointing out that you didn't get what he meant.
Jayen
> "Mad Hamish" <h_l...@bigpond.com> wrote in message
> news:3c44b29c...@news.bigpond.com...
> > >> >The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but
> the
> > >> >consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect
> them
> > >> >from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked
> among
> > >> >some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far
> away
> > >> >(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
> > >>
> > >> So what, the fences around the cricket grounds in India are to
> defend
> > >> the Indian crowd from the people on the field?
> > >
> > >Read Jayen's post again. Maybe you will get the meaning this.
> > >I do not neccessarily agree with what he is saying, but basically
> > >you don't get what he means.
> > >
> > So the fences around the playing areas are to stop foreign
> terrorists?
>
> As I said, I do not neccessarily agree with what he is saying.
> I was just pointing out that you didn't get what he meant.
>
The original message that I was responding to had
"On the boundry line they have the army with machine guns"
It was primarily that part that I was responding to. Maybe even that
wouldn't stop a serious attack, but the security guys must have
*something* planned.
Regards,
Jayen
Mike Holmans
keyboard and brought forth:
> The barbed wire and 10 foot
>high fences are not always a reflection on the locals.
They may not be. But I was fascinated to read in Mihir Bose's History
of Indian Cricket that there have been fences in front of the cheap
seats since the 1930s.
Cheers,
Mike
sudeep
>
> >"Adam" <adam...@froggy.com.au> wrote in message news:<3c404...@mercury.planet.net.au>...
> >> what about india or sl where the they don't even bother putting seating in
> >> the groung couse the crowd light it on fire,
> >
> >Eh?
> >
> >> On the boundry line they have
> >> the army with machine guns and to watch the cricket it has to been seen
> >> through barbed wire 10 foot high fences, compare it to austrlia where there
> >> is no barbed wire fencing seeting and unarmed security guead with a few
> >> coppers
> >
> >The US consulate in Madras has had all this since the 70s, but the
> >consulate guys have repeatedly stated that it is not to protect them
> >from the local populace but because Americans are not well-liked among
> >some sections of the middle-eastern guys, who are not too far away
> >(Remember the hostage crisis, circa 1979?)
>
> So what, the fences around the cricket grounds in India are to defend
> the Indian crowd from the people on the field?
Every country has its fair share of louts (some may argue australia
has MORE than its fair share)...when you have a BILLION people...you
have ALOT more louts...hence the extra protection.