zaremba
Cricketer Of The Year
Ponting was asked about it!
Australian Captain Questioned At Press Conference
Shocked Into Responding At Length Against His Will
Shocked Into Responding At Length Against His Will
Ponting was asked about it!
Haha yeah, he could easily have said, "nah, nothing to see here" if he didn't want to stir the ****Australian Captain Questioned At Press Conference
Shocked Into Responding At Length Against His Will
Australian Captain Questioned At Press Conference
Shocked Into Responding At Length Against His Will
TBF I reckon the Indians (one sixth of the total human population, or thereabouts) have some clue after their last tour down under. You might've missed it but there was quite the to-do.
It's funny how everything he says gets under you guys's skin when the rest of the world doesn't seem to have a clue what the fuss is about.
Haha, I don't get what the fuss is about when the Indian fans get cranky regarding Ponting either. He wasn't given a crucial decision and got mildly annoyed? By God, what a horrible man.TBF I reckon the Indians (one sixth of the total human population, or thereabouts) have some clue after their last tour down under. You might've missed it but there was quite the to-do.
Several rimes Ponting's behaviour has fallen below what one would expect of the position he holds, including the blatant dissent he showed when the "catch" he took was (correctly) turned down in the test just ended.
In all honesty, Fred deserves some credit as well - not his natural game and he lasted an hour and a half, more than 4 of the top 6 put together.Anyway, fwiw (and I have to say this because there's only so many conspiracy theories one can set store in), England didn't draw through any time wasting. They did it because Collingwood, Anderson and Monty batted really well. So did Swann, but he's a ****.
It's not being mildy annoyed, it's walking down to the umpire brandishing the ball like an enraged chimpanzee clutching a fresh turd. If you consider such displays worthy of the Australian captain we'll have to agree to disagree. In any event it's hardly the first time he's shown dissent and, as others have pointed out, by so doing he opens himself to accusations of humbuggery when he invokes The Spirit of Cricket™.Haha, I don't get what the fuss is about when the Indian fans get cranky regarding Ponting either. He wasn't given a crucial decision and got mildly annoyed? By God, what a horrible man.
He's really hairy though. Weird.Haha, I don't get what the fuss is about when the Indian fans get cranky regarding Ponting either. He wasn't given a crucial decision and got mildly annoyed? By God, what a horrible man.
Sorry but it's time to inject a dose of reality into this "debate"It's not being mildy annoyed, it's walking down to the umpire brandishing the ball like an enraged chimpanzee clutching a fresh turd. If you consider such displays worthy of the Australian captain we'll have to agree to disagree. In any event it's hardly the first time he's shown dissent and, as others have pointed out, by so doing he opens himself to accusations of humbuggery when he invokes The Spirit of Cricket™.
As I've said Ponting is quite within his rights to say we indulged in gamesmanship, no-one is going to disagree save those who might be fined by the ICC for admitting it, but when Ponting says (& I quote) "We came to play by the rules and the spirit of the game" he's attempting to stake a claim to the moral high ground. After his blatant dissent (and it was), he leaves himself open to accusations of hypocrisy, no?Sorry but it's time to inject a dose of reality into this "debate"
The only reason why this "subject" is open for discusssion is that the Eng media needed something to deflect our attention away from Eng's PITIFUL performance
The Eng batsmen did what every cricket team has done since the beginning of time but in a completely ridiculous fashion (waste time by all means but 2 interventions in 2 balls is complete crap)
Ponting and the Oz fieldmen were over the top in the last session but so were Monty and Prior who "appealed" for every delivery that came within 2 feet of the stumps and took the bails off to boot and all whilst conceding approx 700 runs
Ponting was incredibly gracious with his after match comments
Move on people, there's nothing more to see here
Like this English media?Sorry but it's time to inject a dose of reality into this "debate"
The only reason why this "subject" is open for discusssion is that the Eng media needed something to deflect our attention away from Eng's PITIFUL performance
The Eng batsmen did what every cricket team has done since the beginning of time but in a completely ridiculous fashion (waste time by all means but 2 interventions in 2 balls is complete crap)
Ponting and the Oz fieldsmen were over the top in the last session but so were Monty, Prior, etc who "appealed" for every delivery that came within 2 feet of the stumps and took the bails off to boot and all whilst conceding approx 700 runs
Ponting was incredibly gracious with his after match comments
Move on people, there's nothing more to see here
I'm no Ponting fan (other than as a batsman) but he does have the high moral ground in this caseAs I've said Ponting is quite within his rights to say we indulged in gamesmanship, no-one is going to disagree save those who might be fined by the ICC for admitting it, but when Ponting says (& I quote) "We came to play by the rules and the spirit of the game" he's attempting to stake a claim to the moral high ground. After his blatant dissent (and it was), he leaves himself open to accusations of hypocrisy, no?
If you're assuming that Malcolm Conn has any credibility whatsoever within the Oz cricket community, then you'd be wrongLike this English media?
ANDREW Strauss is either a weak leader or has no idea about the spirit of cricket.
You seem to be repeatedly ignoring the blatant fact that he had a huge display of dissent and intimidated the umpires which is worthy of a trip to the match referee's room at the very least.I'm no Ponting fan (other than as a batsman) but he does have the high moral ground in this case
Furthermore, if it does nothing more than distract Eng from resurrecting their Ashes' planning, good on him but I think it was simply a gracious answer to an inflammatory question
Well sorry, but then you're either condoning dissent or indulging in a cheesey bit of moral relativism. Ponting didn't say "We're not going to go as far against the spirit of the game as the poms", did he? No equivocation in his statement, "We came to play by the rules and the spirit of the game".I'm no Ponting fan (other than as a batsman) but he does have the high moral ground in this case
Furthermore, if it does nothing more than distract Eng from resurrecting their Ashes' planning, good on him but I think it was simply a gracious answer to an inflammatory question
A dose of reality! Excellent.Sorry but it's time to inject a dose of reality into this "debate"
The only reason why this "subject" is open for discusssion is that the Eng media needed something to deflect our attention away from Eng's PITIFUL performance
I think it'll have distracted Strauss and Flower for the precisely 15 minutes that it took their laughter to subside.I'm no Ponting fan (other than as a batsman) but he does have the high moral ground in this case
Furthermore, if it does nothing more than distract Eng from resurrecting their Ashes' planning, good on him but I think it was simply a gracious answer to an inflammatory question
Utter nonsenseYou seem to be repeatedly ignoring the blatant fact that he had a huge display of dissent and intimidated the umpires which is worthy of a trip to the match referee's room at the very least.