Sunil blasts the Australians part II

[viktor]

Yeah, that too. I have heard it mentioned, but not anywhere near to the level Sunny seems to (want to?) believe.

I guess one could debate as to the exact number of articles that would constitute a flurry but here are a few:
http://www.thetimes.co.za/News/Article.aspx?id=729697
http://www.smh.com.au/news/cricket/...t-as-we-know-it/2008/03/17/1205602295334.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article3571439.ece
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/sport/cricket/article3515868.ece
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/main.jhtml?xml=/sport/2008/03/17/ucicc117.xml

Mind you, not all of these are dedicated to this particular issue but do mention it.

 

[weldone]

Exactly, who cares what Sunil says really.

I care that little I didn't even bother reading the article before I posted this

Exactly why would you care about what a person with more than 10000 test runs says? Better care about what a bowler bowling at the speed of wind (but alas, declaring his retirement too soon ) says... That'll suit you better...

 

[Sanz]

From the article;

As soon as Mr Bindra’s name was announced, there were a flurry of articles in England and Australia that giving him the job would put too much power in India’s hands, as Mr Pawar was going to be President of the ICC in 2010.

Anyone else wondering where this 'flurry' of articles is coming from? Smacks of the oldest trick in the political play-book (used extensively by George W); make some random statement along the lines of "Many people are saying x....." and write and article about why you disagree with it to make a point, despite that there's not 'many' people saying it at all.

Seriously, where's this coverage supposedly been? The only stuff I've seen in Aussie papers is the appointment of Patel.

It is obvious that Sunny reads more newspapers than you do. Here are a few of the 'flurry of articles' :-

Cricket's future in jeopardy - The Age

India power play will be a test of strength for Morgan's rule- The Guardian

Power play may mean curtains for cricket as we know it - The SMH

India's big-money Twenty20 competition marks the end of cricket as we know it - ScotlandonSunday

Why voting Indian into ICC hotseat would be bad for game - Time OnLine UK

There are many more such articles, please do some research before questioning sunny's articles.

 

[Richard]

Exactly why would you care about what a person with more than 10000 test runs says?

Because number of Test runs is irrelevant to one's sagaciousness on the game.

 

[weldone]

Because number of Test runs is irrelevant to one's sagaciousness on the game.

What is relevant then? The number of posts?

 

[Jono]

Sanz has a point, all you hear nowadays is how India having more power than the Anglo nations will be bad for the game. Whether its a fair enough thought is a different matter, but for TC to pretend like there's not a whole lot of whinging about India's power is wrong.

 

[Top_Cat]

It is obvious that Sunny reads more newspapers than you do. Here are a few of the 'flurry of articles' :-

Cricket's future in jeopardy - The Age

India power play will be a test of strength for Morgan's rule- The Guardian

Power play may mean curtains for cricket as we know it - The SMH

India's big-money Twenty20 competition marks the end of cricket as we know it - ScotlandonSunday

Why voting Indian into ICC hotseat would be bad for game - Time OnLine UK

There are many more such articles, please do some research before questioning sunny's articles.

1 & 2 are the same article and 4 is about IPL, not about the ICC positions at all. I've looked and I see a few articles about the issue but either the same text is reprinted in multiple places or the issue is mentioned briefly in articles about other stuff. Where's the outrage by multiple commentators in multiple countries? Sorry, not convinced that it's being made as big a deal as Sunny is saying. There's some coverage, sure, but it's generating nowhere near the ink or comment that the tour of Australia did, for example.

 

[silentstriker]

He still hasn't gotten over being denied entry at the MCC, so he's a bit bitter. In his position, I'd be a bit bitter too. Obviously not an excuse - just not someone to pay attention to.

 

[biased indian]

Seriously, where's this coverage supposedly been? The only stuff I've seen in Aussie papers is the appointment of Patel.

There's some coverage, sure, but it's generating nowhere near the ink or comment that the tour of Australia did, for example.

more links and we could see a little bit more change

 

[Richard]

So find 'em then.

 

[Sanz]

1 & 2 are the same article

They both cover a different geographilcal group of readers and also have different heading kind of giving the look of two different articles.

and 4 is about IPL, not about the ICC positions at all.

But the contxt is same.

I've looked and I see a few articles about the issue but either the same text is reprinted in multiple places or the issue is mentioned briefly in articles about other stuff. Where's the outrage by multiple commentators in multiple countries? Sorry, not convinced that it's being made as big a deal as Sunny is saying. There's some coverage, sure, but it's generating nowhere near the ink or comment that the tour of Australia did, for example.

It takes courage to say that 'I am wrong', I am sure you have displayed none of it in this thread. Go on blabber your ignorance on the subject. I have nothing much to say in this reagard.

 

[Sanz]

He still hasn't gotten over being denied entry at the MCC, so he's a bit bitter. In his position, I'd be a bit bitter too. Obviously not an excuse - just not someone to pay attention to.

Ofcourse, it has to be that, Gosh SS you are so predictable with your attacks on some cricketers.

 

[Ikki]

1 & 2 are the same article and 4 is about IPL, not about the ICC positions at all. I've looked and I see a few articles about the issue but either the same text is reprinted in multiple places or the issue is mentioned briefly in articles about other stuff. Where's the outrage by multiple commentators in multiple countries? Sorry, not convinced that it's being made as big a deal as Sunny is saying. There's some coverage, sure, but it's generating nowhere near the ink or comment that the tour of Australia did, for example.

Agreed. It's not in the forefront of anyone's concerns here, with regards to Cricket. If the media wanted it to be so it would certainly be shown that way.

 

[silentstriker]

Ofcourse, it has to be that, Gosh SS you are so predictable with your attacks on some cricketers.

Hah, you can't tell me he isn't. I'm not saying I'd be any different though, so its not like I'm treating him unfairly.

 

[ret]

"Those worried of the prospect of India's hegemony were conveniently forgetting that only a few years back, there were two Australians at the top of the ICC. It is a misplaced belief that they are the only ones with honesty, integrity and have the welfare of the game at heart, while the 'subcontinentals' do not."

Valid point that one

 

[Richard]

It would be valid, if anyone actually thought it. And only complete ninconpoops would think Australians were more viable for controlling the game than Asians simply because they're Australians.

 

[BoyBrumby]

The nature of the internet means that one can probably find articles to support whatever persecution complex one happens to be festering, but a lot of Sunny's article is quite unattractive &, in parts, not a little nonsensical.

He even uses the opportunity to launch into a tirade about India hosting the 2010 hockey world cup:

"Talking of bullying, one wonders what the reaction of these people would be to the threat of the Federation of International Hockey to take away the 2010 World Cup hockey from India, unless India totally accepts project ‘Promoting Indian Hockey’ that was being proposed by the FIH. How and why should the staging of the World Cup be linked to a development project is hard to understand, but that kind of bullying does not raise any comment from these guys, presumably because it is coming from Europeans, while the BCCI standing behind its player who was wrongly and falsely accused of racist comment is looked as strong-arm tactics. Wow!"

Now, I'm sorry if India is being forced into measures it doesn't want, but surely the reason "these guys" haven't passed comment on what is quite clearly a hockey issue is that, being cricket writers/commentators/administrators, they either don't know or don't care about it. His use of "Europeans" isn't very nice either; if Geoff Boycott (to pick another embittered opener entirely at random) had used "Indians" in the same context he'd be (rightly) castigated as (at best) the worst kind of little Englander & at worst a borderline racist.

 

[ret]

It would be valid, if anyone actually thought it. And only complete ninconpoops would think Australians were more viable for controlling the game than Asians simply because they're Australians.

I m pointing towards the hipocrisy of having two guys at the top from one nation earlier but then opposing it in Ind's case

though BCCI is good enough to control things, no matter who is at the helm

 

[Richard]

I m pointing towards the hipocrisy of having two guys at the top from one nation earlier but then opposing it in Ind's case

I'm well aware what you're pointing to - I'm pointing to the fact that said hypocrisy didn't really happen very much.

 

[silentstriker]

I'm well aware what you're pointing to - I'm pointing to the fact that said hypocrisy didn't really happen very much.

I don't want to get into another Sunil debate, but that's false. I read at least 4-5 articles saying that two indians wouldn't be good. Incidently, I agreed with those articles, considering I don't want two BCCI men either, but the articles were most certianly written.