Ashraf puts Malcom back in his place

[IndianByHeart]

Any more ridiculous than the defence mounted by Asif and Shoaib?

Warne committed the crime and did the time - the other guys are still running

The reason provided by Warne was ridiculous, the defence of Asif and Akhtar was provided by PCB.

And i have already said that differnce b/w warne and Akhtar and Asif is that Warne served the ban, so whats the point in mentioning it again

 

[Richard]

ICC operates under WADA and why is it so absurd?

See Steulen.

WADA cannot possibly be taken seriously IMO, their announced policies are a shambles.

 

[IndianByHeart]

ICC operates under WADA and why is it so absurd?

The fact that they took the drug is not disputed, WADA is contesting the decision of PCB to let go free its player, and not as to whether they have taken the drug or not.Unless Akhtar and Asif plays another tournament, they aren't going to be required to be tested.

 

[IndianByHeart]

ICC operates under WADA and why is it so absurd?

For the sake of argument if we agree that during the trial Wada ask Akhtar and Asif to undergo doping test (for God knows what reason) and supppose they clear it then what will be Wada's point of view?? then they should let them go free??

Akhar and Asif will face trial for the drug that they took in Oct 2006 and for which they tested positive in 2006.There won't be any future tests and they aren't likely to play any more matches untill the trial is over

 

[social]

The reason provided by Warne was ridiculous, the defence of Asif and Akhtar was provided by PCB.

And i have already said that differnce b/w warne and Akhtar and Asif is that Warne served the ban, so whats the point in mentioning it again

Aaaaaah, because they didnt serve the ban and you keep bringing up the only comparable case - Warne

 

[social]

The fact that they took the drug is not disputed, WADA is contesting the decision of PCB to let go free its player, and not as to whether they have taken the drug or not.Unless Akhtar and Asif plays another tournament, they aren't going to be required to be tested.

Wrong!

WADA requires that players make themselves available for testing.

The world knows that Shoaib and Asif were going to be tested at the WC and as there is a question as to their motivation for withdrawal, WADA has a right to be concerned.

 

[Richard]

WADA's right to be anything is questionable.

 

[social]

For the sake of argument if we agree that during the trial Wada ask Akhtar and Asif to undergo doping test (for God knows what reason) and supppose they clear it then what will be Wada's point of view?? then they should let them go free??

Akhar and Asif will face trial for the drug that they took in Oct 2006 and for which they tested positive in 2006.There won't be any future tests and they aren't likely to play any more matches untill the trial is over

WADA will demand a 2 year ban for the first offence.

They will also demand to see medical certificates for their withdrawal from the WC.

Forthcoming - ok

Failure to provide - life ban

Precedent is clear

 

[social]

WADA's right to be anything is questionable.

Richard, if you want to defend drug cheats, be my guest!

Being a traditionalist, I would've thought you'd agree that the sport was better off without them

 

[Richard]

WADA go about things completely the wrong way IMO from what I know of them.

 

[social]

WADA go about things completely the wrong way IMO from what I know of them.

In this instance, they were completely outmanouvered by the defence.

However, since that time, they have backed the defendants and the PCB into a corner where there is no getting out of IMO.

 

[Langeveldt]

Pah, the best way to beat these drug cheats is to trounce their team in consecutive series'

 

[Richard]

In this instance, they were completely outmanouvered by the defence.

However, since that time, they have backed the defendants and the PCB into a corner where there is no getting out of IMO.

What does that have to do with anything?

IMO their presumption that because someone has certain substances in their body makes them automatically guilty of something wrong, along with their assumed divine right to test someone whenever, wherever (even if, for example, they haven't played or aren't going to play for 5 months), makes them a pretty dubious bunch in my eyes.

 

[Slow Love™]

Speed's "place" is surely screaming inside a barrell going over Victoria Falls, so I don't know that it can be claimed that Ashraf's quite achieved that.

I'm not really sure about how subjudice works in this context, where the facts of the case aren't really being disputed (or don't seem to be), and it appears more a matter of regulation and jurisdiction. But either way, the PCB is skating on thin ice credibility wise. Does anybody really doubt that they are out and out lying about the reasons Asif and Shoaib can't play? It's one thing to screw up a genuine effort to deal with the issue of illegal substances when it comes to your cricket team (depending on what you choose to believe), but the dishonesty about their current predicament will only cost the PCB further respect.

 

[Smudge]

I think you meant , "Are you trying to correct some one's grammar ?"
EPO please !

Gold.

 

[Richard]

Speed's "place" is surely screaming inside a barrell going over Victoria Falls, so I don't know that it can be claimed that Ashraf's quite achieved that.

Even for Malcolm Speed, that's a bit harsh.

 

[Slow Love™]

Even for Malcolm Speed, that's a bit harsh.

Yeah, Speed's reaction to that comment suggests it might have been a bit OTT.

 

[social]

Yeah, Speed's reaction to that comment suggests it might have been a bit OTT.

Speed's reaction to the birth of his first child