• Welcome to the Cricket Web forums, one of the biggest forums in the world dedicated to cricket.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join the Cricket Web community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us.

***Official*** India in England 2014

YorksLanka

YorksLanka

International Debutant
G.I.Joe said:
Bollocks. That's like saying that no SL player can moan about not being paid given the bad decisions of their cricket board.
Click to expand...
But last time I looked, our players not being paid DOESNT affect the outcome of a game whereas the correct decision bring picked up By having DRS in our Lords test DID. The logic is simply wrong, anyone who has been hit in the box whilst batting knows it doesn't give 100% protection but only a fool wouldn't have it because it isn't 100% foolproof. You take the best you can get...
 
viriya

viriya

International Captain
Adders said:
Don't bite the hand that feeds you.
Click to expand...
You think they would drop him for that? I highly doubt that. Anyway, that's unlikely to change the board's opinion.. Only Dhoni probably has enough influence.. Otherwise it has to be an atrociously-umpired Test I would think.
 
Adders

Adders

Cricketer Of The Year
viriya said:
Ok, but how would the board's DRS position change? I'm just envisioning one scenario..
Click to expand...
Well a good start would be get the DRS to ****ing work properly. It has been greatly improved by the introduction of snicko I'll admit, before that it was a joke and I was almost getting to the point where I thought the BCCI were right all along.

I don't believe that they should be allowed to boycott as they have, but I do think their concerns have been justified.
 
G.I.Joe

G.I.Joe

International Coach
YorksLanka said:
But last time I looked, our players not being paid DOESNT affect the outcome of a game whereas the correct decision bring picked up By having DRS in our Lords test DID. The logic is simply wrong, anyone who has been hit in the box whilst batting knows it doesn't give 100% protection but only a fool wouldn't have it because it isn't 100% foolproof. You take the best you can get...
Click to expand...
No one's claiming that a lack of DRS doesn't affect the game, you tool. You can go off spouting stuff that no one disagrees with, or you could accept the fallacy of your logic which you have conveniently not bothered to address here. You cannot implicate someone for the actions of a party he has no control over.
 
Last edited:
viriya

viriya

International Captain
Adders said:
Well a good start would be get the DRS to ****ing work properly. It has been greatly improved by the introduction of snicko I'll admit, before that it was a joke and I was almost getting to the point where I thought the BCCI were right all along.

I don't believe that they should be allowed to boycott as they have, but I do think their concerns have been justified.
Click to expand...
DRS is in a good enough position already. It can be improved of course but it's not a good enough argument to not use it.
 
Teja.

Teja.

Global Moderator
Haha, we're toast, 450 was par on this bitch and that's before considering how **** India's bowling attack is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top