Why were Waqar Younis & Azhar Mahmood punished?

[honestbharani]

The ICC are a funny lot HB, take Asif for instance do you think if Warne was caught smuggling drugs into another country he would have been let off completely. No Australian player would have played cricket again if they did that but Asif has escaped any punishment for it.

I agree that the ICC bow down to media pressure, esp. from the subcontinent sides... But the issue here is about match referees.. When it goes higher up in the ICC, India and the subcontinent obviously call the shots. But at the match referee level, I do think Aussies, Englishmen and South Africans are let off lightly than the others for similar and same offences.... I wish both parts would change, tbh.

 

[Uppercut]

yeah, BASED ON THE SAME RULES!!! Or are those different too?

The rules are vague, and the Oval incident has changed widespread interpretations of them.

If I don't think what Anderson did counts as ball tampering then why should I be bound by a different decision made by a different person in a different (albeit similar) scenario ten years earlier? Double standards don't occur when one person does something that another person wouldn't have done.

 

[honestbharani]

The rules are vague, and the Oval incident has changed widespread interpretations of them.

If I don't think what Anderson did counts as ball tampering then why should I be bound by a different decision made by a different person in a different (albeit similar) scenario ten years earlier? Double standards don't occur when one person does something that another person wouldn't have done.

If you read my earlier posts, you will understand why this is an issue. If this were an isolated incident where an English or Aussie or Saffie player got away doing something that a player from another side didn't, the reactions would be different. The problem is, this is not the first time and this is another incident in a rather long list where the punishments have been extremely light for a player from either AUS,SA or Eng than it is for a player from any other country. Whether double standards are actually involved or not is only known to the parties involved... But there is no way you can rule out double standard with certainity just like you cannot insist that there are double standards involved with certainity. That is the crux of the issue. And with the people claiming double standards, there are a lot of previous incidents they can show as precedents to this one...


I understand and respect you, Burgey, GIMH or Zaremba wanting to think there is no double standards involved here.. That is fine, you have a right to your opinion but there is no bloody way you can come out here and insist there is no double standards involved because there have been such instances in the past where for basically the same offence, other players have been punished far more heavily than Aussies, Saffies and Englishmen... And there are examples of other offences too when a player from Aus, Eng or SA got away a lot more lightly than a player from some other country.


My gripe with this thread is how easily you guys are blowing this off as if it is some blinding fact that these match refs are always neutral and are angels of justice...

 

[GIMH]

So let's discount this clear instance of a non-double standard, what are your other examples from this century?

 

[Uppercut]

Why I have any reason to "want" to believe there's no pro-English/Australian/South African conspiracy is beyond me. Unless Ireland are in on it too and I'm an undercover agent for the ICC.

 

[Furball]

If you read my earlier posts, you will understand why this is an issue. If this were an isolated incident where an English or Aussie or Saffie player got away doing something that a player from another side didn't, the reactions would be different. The problem is, this is not the first time and this is another incident in a rather long list where the punishments have been extremely light for a player from either AUS,SA or Eng than it is for a player from any other country. Whether double standards are actually involved or not is only known to the parties involved... But there is no way you can rule out double standard with certainity just like you cannot insist that there are double standards involved with certainity. That is the crux of the issue. And with the people claiming double standards, there are a lot of previous incidents they can show as precedents to this one...


I understand and respect you, Burgey, GIMH or Zaremba wanting to think there is no double standards involved here.. That is fine, you have a right to your opinion but there is no bloody way you can come out here and insist there is no double standards involved because there have been such instances in the past where for basically the same offence, other players have been punished far more heavily than Aussies, Saffies and Englishmen... And there are examples of other offences too when a player from Aus, Eng or SA got away a lot more lightly than a player from some other country.


My gripe with this thread is how easily you guys are blowing this off as if it is some blinding fact that these match refs are always neutral and are angels of justice...

Produce this list, or lose credibility.

 

[GIMH]

Dammit Dinnen, I'm sick of agreeing with you in every thread in CC, get posting in devvers so I can remember how much I hate you

 

[four_or_six]

You cannot take any incident independently anyway. Match referees are influenced by more than the isolated incident. One of the reasons I think that Australians appear to get off more lightly is that they always plead guilty and apologise the the umpires and referee, and this is taken into account in the sentencing.

Also, sometimes people compare incidents and then forget that other things are involved - for example comparing Johnson to Gambhir, where Gambhir's sentence reflected that he had been found guilty of physical contact already once that year and therefore the rules say he is to be more harshly punished. In fact, on the first occasion Gambhir was fined 15% of his match fee which was almost indistinguishable from Johnson's 10%

Personally, I think it's much more complex that people make out, and if Aussies/Saffas/English do get lower punishments it's more likely to be an indirect consequence of some cultural norm in these countries than xxx match referee/umpire/ICC are a bunch of racists.

 

[Shri]

Awta.

 

[GIMH]

You cannot take any incident independently anyway. Match referees are influenced by more than the isolated incident. One of the reasons I think that Australians appear to get off more lightly is that they always plead guilty and apologise the the umpires and referee, and this is taken into account in the sentencing.

Also, sometimes people compare incidents and then forget that other things are involved - for example comparing Johnson to Gambhir, where Gambhir's sentence reflected that he had been found guilty of physical contact already once that year and therefore the rules say he is to be more harshly punished. In fact, on the first occasion Gambhir was fined 15% of his match fee which was almost indistinguishable from Johnson's 10%

Personally, I think it's much more complex that people make out, and if Aussies/Saffas/English do get lower punishments it's more likely to be an indirect consequence of some cultural norm in these countries than xxx match referee/umpire/ICC are a bunch of racists.

Excellent, rational and well thought out post. I think you're in the wrong forum tbh.

No seriously, AWTA

 

[four_or_six]

Excellent, rational and well thought out post. I think you're in the wrong forum tbh.

No seriously, AWTA

Um, yeah, I was really concentrating hard at work.

Seriously, women should run the ICC.

 

[GIMH]

You make a good post and then follow it up with a stupid heap of dross like that!

Just hope that aussie doesn't see it

 

[zaremba]

New thread started.

 

[four_or_six]

New thread started.

Very sensible, wouldn't want this one to get controversial.

 

[zaremba]

Very sensible, wouldn't want this one to get controversial.

I have invited your contribution there 4or6. Saznoz is busy trolling there, you might want to have a word.

 

[honestbharani]

You cannot take any incident independently anyway. Match referees are influenced by more than the isolated incident. One of the reasons I think that Australians appear to get off more lightly is that they always plead guilty and apologise the the umpires and referee, and this is taken into account in the sentencing.

Also, sometimes people compare incidents and then forget that other things are involved - for example comparing Johnson to Gambhir, where Gambhir's sentence reflected that he had been found guilty of physical contact already once that year and therefore the rules say he is to be more harshly punished. In fact, on the first occasion Gambhir was fined 15% of his match fee which was almost indistinguishable from Johnson's 10%

Personally, I think it's much more complex that people make out, and if Aussies/Saffas/English do get lower punishments it's more likely to be an indirect consequence of some cultural norm in these countries than xxx match referee/umpire/ICC are a bunch of racists.

Too many to quote here.. But the handling of Benn and the Aussies would be one, the incident that Slater got away with and then weeks later Sourav was fined (and just for you, UpperCut, by the SAME match ref) for holding up his bat during an lbw appeal.. These are juz off the top of my head. I am sure I can find stuff when I get the time.. As a matter of fact, there are many instances which have been raised here on CW itself.. Adam Hollioke did an absolute cry baby act reg. a run out once in the Windies and got away dirt cheap and a few weeks before, Lara said something like "I think you should have gone to the 3rd umpire" for a run out call and was made to sit out few games... I am at work and I cannot spend all my time producing these lists but I have listed what I remember right now. As I remember more, I will post them here..


And of course, GingerFurball, produce a bloody sensible answer to why Procter made those comments reg. RSA and Aussie players getting away with stuff because "that is the way they play the game"... or lose credibility..........................................................................


And quite funny that my credibility is questioned at the first instance when the very credibility of some of these match refs can never get questioned..


And btw, double standard DOES NOT mean it has to be done by the same person in all cases.. When parties are punished differently under the SAME LAWS for the same offences, they can still be reasonably claimed to be double standards even if the men in charge of the decisions are not the same. Something has to be common for the term to apply and here the laws are common.


And GIMH, it is your opinion that instance is NON-double standard.. That doesn't mean fact.. As Vaughan said, had this Akhtar or Asif, there would have been huge fuss, and that is the issue...

 

[honestbharani]

You cannot take any incident independently anyway. Match referees are influenced by more than the isolated incident. One of the reasons I think that Australians appear to get off more lightly is that they always plead guilty and apologise the the umpires and referee, and this is taken into account in the sentencing.

Also, sometimes people compare incidents and then forget that other things are involved - for example comparing Johnson to Gambhir, where Gambhir's sentence reflected that he had been found guilty of physical contact already once that year and therefore the rules say he is to be more harshly punished. In fact, on the first occasion Gambhir was fined 15% of his match fee which was almost indistinguishable from Johnson's 10%

Personally, I think it's much more complex that people make out, and if Aussies/Saffas/English do get lower punishments it's more likely to be an indirect consequence of some cultural norm in these countries than xxx match referee/umpire/ICC are a bunch of racists.

Where did anyone here say "racist"???


And reg. pleading guilty, how many times is one going to get away with initiating meaningless showdowns and then pleading guilty????? If he is the one stirring the pot, doesn't he deserve a 3 match ban and if he pleads guilty, tone it down to 2.. Why the hell is the man who initiated a needless showdown getting away with less than a man who was provoked when there really has been no "actual legal crime" committed that would aggrieve one of the parties???????

 

[Streetwise]

And GIMH, it is your opinion that instance is NON-double standard.. That doesn't mean fact.. As Vaughan said, had this Akhtar or Asif, there would have been huge fuss, and that is the issue...

I just dont buy it.

ICC match referee Mike Procter has cleared Pakistan speedster Shoaib Akhtar of ball-tampering during the third one-dayer against England at The Rose Bowl.

Pictures from host broadcaster Sky Television appeared to show Akhtar flicking at the ball with his left thumb, however, Procter said the fast bowler has no case to answer.

"After viewing television footage the match umpires have decided no action should be taken against any Pakistan players," Procter said in a statement.

Pakistan argued that Akhtar was cleaning the ball, which is allowed under the Laws of Cricket.
Sports & News

 

[four_or_six]

Where did anyone here say "racist"???

Um, the original post?

 

[GIMH]

And GIMH, it is your opinion that instance is NON-double standard.. That doesn't mean fact.. As Vaughan said, had this Akhtar or Asif, there would have been huge fuss, and that is the issue...

Look, I'm sorry I have to say this but Akhtar & Asif are the worst examples to use for any cases of double-standards, so let's just leave that at that