So true. In fact he has overblown by suggesting Vettori called Haddin a cheat. What a sore loser. Vettori was gentlemanly in suggesting what was clear was a mistake from Haddin, if not intentional. Instead of watching the replay atleast, Ponting has gone ultra defensive and talked rubbish. Another indication that he is not taking captaincy well atm.
Look, come on here if you want and say Haddin's a cheat, or if you want to, say he did that thing last night deliberately.
Dude, get a grip. What have NFL boards peopled by other posters and moderated by other mods got to do with this forum. Absolutely nothing. I get where you are coming from. Frankly, at times, I feel CW too sanitized and over-moderated. Mods are certainly, in my view, over keen with the ban and suspension stick, and come to that, there are probably too many mods for what seems to me to be a rather small board. That said, people around here (me included) do, at times, tend to forget that it is just a game and get drawn into long, heated, and essentially (but always only in retrospect) useless arguments. Point is that these are the rules here, so stick to them.
Agree with you (and with social) on this. They are being paid to play the best game in the world. I wish I were that lucky.howardj;1809218 said:
i apologize if you thought that i said all aussie players are cheaters which ofcourse is not the case.Look, come on here if you want and say Haddin's a cheat, or if you want to, say he did that thing last night deliberately.
But don't call everyone who plays for Australia a cheat, because it's a generalisation. It'd be like me saying everyone who plays for any team where a player does something nefarious is automatically a cheat. It's wrong, it's a personal attack on an individual's integrity, and you're a knob for saying it.
And yes, the last comment I made is a personal attack. Seeing as you accused me of it, I thought I'd make your prophecy a self-fulfilling one.
Ironically, the time to implement it would have been 2-3 years ago, when they arguably had players to cover the absence of blokes like Ponting. IIRC they've done it before to an extent, but there's been a bit of a backlash against it. Now, I really don't see how they can afford to rest someone like him.
Oh well.
So true. Ponting rested in a live series match would give all sorts of the worst negative messages to the public as well as the teammates. Not to mention the ill-will accompanying it, "He's going to burn his bum in India for two months in the hottest weather, so he can't play two matches for his home country when it needs him" kind of thoughts.
I used to think about him like that. However these days I am wondering whether all his fighting spirit is all talk and no walk. Case in point include but not limited to Nagpur Test 2008, when he ostensibly put fear of a ban in front of team;s chance of winning. So that he could play a test against NZ. Ironically the same team against which he is getting rested now.
No he suggested the Haddin "knew something was wrong" and should have done something about it. That's utter rot and is akin to calling Haddin a cheat. Vettori could have been much more diplomatic with his comments.
Suggesting that Haddin might have known that not everything was hunky dory is nowhere in the same ship as suggesting he is a cheat. Vettori suggested Haddin might have made a mistake, and was not sure about it, and ideally should've consulted the ump if he was not sure, as was evident from his body language.
Your kidding, right?
Lol, that's really poor stuff from you. Bringing in another doubtful albiet ultimately given in favor of batsman due to too much doubt, which was the right thing, to defend an atrociously poor dismissal involving Haddin. More than blaming Haddin, I;d blame umpire Oxenford, who failed to spot that his gloves were in front of the stumps, and such stuff would be picked even in street cricket.
