Butt/Amir/Asif - Spot Fixing Trial

[Cevno]

The jail sentence was light in comparison to what the other two players got anyway, the insinuation on Cricinfo was Asif wouldn't appeal against the penalty itself.

You can't really compare someone like Hitler with Asif. Asif is just an entirely selfish scumbag who'll do anything he can get away with. I can't think of a single good quality he possesses.

Someone like Hitler was someone who at least had some strength of character and conviction. Unfortunately he was a total nutcase and like many misguided people in this world believed a few experiences were enough to brand a whole group and that was enough to justify evil. It's possible in another dimension someone like Hitler had a balanced view of the World and did a lot of good, obviously in this one he was a huge negative influence. In every dimension Asif will be an entirely selfish scumbag. Anyway you brought up Hitler first so you forfeit the argument.

 

[Fusion]

I can actually see where Scaly is coming from there tbh.

Explain please, because it makes absolutely zero sense to me and is frankly one of the most bizarre things I've read.

 

[Cevno]

I can actually see where Scaly is coming from there tbh.

I can too tbh to some extent, but can't understand what dimension he is talking about where Hitler will be good. Same subjective fringe analysis then can surely apply to Asif too.

Also, implication of what he is saying is that Asif is a bigger **** than Hitler, because he didn't have enough as much positives for others as hitler is beyond me. Because then the same applies to the loads of negatives Hitler had for others and the divisive force he was. I.e, they aren't comparable to any extent in contest of being ****'s because atleast Asif isn't going around taking lives of others and making the World a unsafe place for millions and millions.

 

[fredfertang]

I suspect the polnt is that at least Hitler believed he was doing something for the greater good whereas it is inconceivable that Asif did

 

[Prince EWS]

Explain please, because it makes absolutely zero sense to me and is frankly one of the most bizarre things I've read.

He's not equating Asif's actions with Hitler's; in fact he specifically said it was impossible to compare such things. There's no doubt that Hitler's evil was far greater than Asif's, but when looking at the men rather than the outcomes it's not really quite as simple.

Hitler's evil was a result of a "perfect" combination of good and bad qualities. Without the good qualities he possessed, his bad qualities would not have been enabled and his evil would not have been anywhere near as great or as damaging. Imagine a Hitler with all the hatred, blood lust, lack of compassion and general inhumane outlook of the world that the real Hitler had but without the conviction of character, drive to succeed, charisma, leadership skills and determination that he had. This Hitler's impact on the world would've been extremely minimal (not of his own choosing, of course) and his evil far less pronounced, but he wouldn't have been a better man by any stretch of the imagination.

It's possible to admire Hitler for what he managed to achieve while still condemning his goals, his ideology and the unspeakable evil he committed on the entire world. Scaly's point was that it's impossible to really compare Asif with Hitler because one's criticisms of them are so different. Asif, as well as being a ****, is a degenerate with no admirable qualities (other than bowling, perhaps ) and while Hitler committed unspeakable acts that Asif will never approach, the difference in the men perhaps lies more in what they were able to achieve than what they'd be willing to.

 

[keeper]

Bet Asif never made any trains run on time.

And say what you like about Nazis, they wore decent gear. No floppy fringes and poofy velvet jackets for them, cool Hugo Boss all the way.

Hitler was misunderstood and occasionally misguided. Asif is just a prick.

 

[keeper]

By the way, it wasn't me who wrote that.

 

[Agent Nationaux]

I suspect the polnt is that at least Hitler believed he was doing something for the greater good whereas it is inconceivable that Asif did

Yeah, I also think that is what he was trying to say. Also adding what PEWS said, that Asif is a degenerate lowlife.

 

[Cevno]

I suspect the polnt is that at least Hitler believed he was doing something for the greater good whereas it is inconceivable that Asif did

But Hitler was doing something for greater evil too and knew about it.

In any case this is with reference to a couple of incidents of Asif vs a full plethora of history of Hitler. Prima facie unless you know both really close, i don't see whatever be the intent how you can say that Hitler was a better Human than Asif even if he may have had more/larger positives.

 

[Furball]

But Hitler was doing something for greater evil too and knew about it.

In any case this is with reference to a couple of incidents of Asif vs a full plethora of history of Hitler. Prima facie unless you know both really close, i don't see whatever be the intent how you can say that Hitler was a better Human than Asif even if he may have had more/larger positives.

Not in his eyes.

 

[Fusion]

He's not equating Asif's actions with Hitler's; in fact he specifically said it was impossible to compare such things. There's no doubt that Hitler's evil was far greater than Asif's, but when looking at the men rather than the outcomes it's not really quite as simple.

Hitler's evil was a result of a "perfect" combination of good and bad qualities. Without the good qualities he possessed, his bad qualities would not have been enabled and his evil would not have been anywhere near as great or as damaging. Imagine a Hitler with all the hatred, blood lust, lack of compassion and general inhumane outlook of the world that the real Hitler had but without the conviction of character, drive to succeed, charisma, leadership skills and determination that he had. This Hitler's impact on the world would've been extremely minimal (not of his own choosing, of course) and his evil far less pronounced, but he wouldn't have been a better man by any stretch of the imagination.

It's possible to admire Hitler for what he managed to achieve while still condemning his goals, his ideology and the unspeakable evil he committed on the entire world. Scaly's point was that it's impossible to really compare Asif with Hitler because one's criticisms of them are so different. Asif, as well as being a ****, is a degenerate with no admirable qualities (other than bowling, perhaps ) and while Hitler committed unspeakable acts that Asif will never approach, the difference in the men perhaps lies more in what they were able to achieve than what they'd be willing to.

When Scaly says that Asif is "one of the biggest ****s in the history of the human race", he is in fact equating him with the worst ****s in history is he not? As despicable as what Asif did, it was a white collar crime. It is extreme hyperbole to put him in the same pedestal as history's biggest ****s.

Now coming to the redeeming qualities discussion, sorry but I don't buy the reasoning at all. So Hitler had the charm and drive to succeed to lead an entire nation into his path of destruction. I could easily say that Asif had the extreme drive to overcome his poor upbringing and lack of resources and succeed as a cricket player. Or, heck, he had the drive to be a kick ass spot fixer. Remember it wasn't him that caused the downfall, it was the agent falling for the sting operation.

My whole point is that people like Scaly need to get some perspective here. Sure what these players did was awful and despicable, but let's not go around stating they are as big a ****s as murderers, or even other white collar criminals like Bernie Madoff who ruined people's finances.

 

[Cruxdude]

I am pretty sure Asif had his own set of justifications for whatever he did.

 

[Cevno]

Not in his eyes.

I think he thought he was a "necessarily evil" and that it would take fire to fight with fire in his own words. Ofcourse, that was a result of his delusion and power polluting him.

Can make similar arguments pretty easily for Asif tbh. But that's besides the point.

At a personal level it is hard to tell what Hitler would do in Asif's shoes or what Asif would do in Hitler's but in the balance of Prima facie probability Hitler easily comes out top in the battle of the ****s. Whatever be the reasoning for it.

 

[Lostman]

Not sure if this was asked elsewhere.

But why did these guys even bother going to England and risk jail time?
They have already been banned and their careers ruined. Given the evidence against them couldn't they have just stayed in Pakistan?

 

[Fusion]

Not sure if this was asked elsewhere.

But why did these guys even bother going to England and risk jail time?
They have already been banned and their careers ruined. Given the evidence against them couldn't they have just stayed in Pakistan?

There was a discussion about this several pages back. Read from this post onwards.

 

[Furball]

I think he thought he was a "necessarily evil" and that it would take fire to fight with fire in his own words. Ofcourse, that was a result of his delusion and power polluting him.

No, Hitler's extreme hatred of Jews stemmed from well before he could be corrupted or deluded by any sort of power.

 

[Lostman]

There was a discussion about this several pages back. Read from this post onwards.

Thanks!
Knew someone must have asked it but was too lazy to look for it.

 

[Howe_zat]

Thread's gone Godwin, I'm out.

 

[Flem274*]

Wtf? Who Godwined the thread? WAC.

 

[silentstriker]

He's not equating Asif's actions with Hitler's; in fact he specifically said it was impossible to compare such things. There's no doubt that Hitler's evil was far greater than Asif's, but when looking at the men rather than the outcomes it's not really quite as simple.

Hitler's evil was a result of a "perfect" combination of good and bad qualities. Without the good qualities he possessed, his bad qualities would not have been enabled and his evil would not have been anywhere near as great or as damaging. Imagine a Hitler with all the hatred, blood lust, lack of compassion and general inhumane outlook of the world that the real Hitler had but without the conviction of character, drive to succeed, charisma, leadership skills and determination that he had. This Hitler's impact on the world would've been extremely minimal (not of his own choosing, of course) and his evil far less pronounced, but he wouldn't have been a better man by any stretch of the imagination.

It's possible to admire Hitler for what he managed to achieve while still condemning his goals, his ideology and the unspeakable evil he committed on the entire world. Scaly's point was that it's impossible to really compare Asif with Hitler because one's criticisms of them are so different. Asif, as well as being a ****, is a degenerate with no admirable qualities (other than bowling, perhaps ) and while Hitler committed unspeakable acts that Asif will never approach, the difference in the men perhaps lies more in what they were able to achieve than what they'd be willing to.

Yes, you are right. Asif took money to bowl no balls and injected himself with steroids to bowl better, ergo he has no redeeming human qualities.

Sorry but that was the most bizarre thing I've ever read on the internet, and that's saying quite a bit.