crowe and pringle admitted to it after a game. the story goes they finally intercepted an old ball before a ball boy could get to it first during a test match in pakistan and it looked like it had spent some time in cameron bancrofts crotch so they experimented in the nets between tests then used bottle caps during the next test.Nobody was ever caught for that to my knowledge?
Because Harsh's post is asking why we are making a big deal of it. Something admitted to years later is not exactly news, nor is sanction possible of a player who has already retired.I mean, Imran wasn't caught, he just admitted it years later. Not sure we should lionise successfully getting away with it here.
Obviously they benefited, but they would have benefited either way because, bluntly, CA more or less tried to buy them off by offering them huge contracts in exchange for scrapping revenue sharing.I admit I didn't know the ins and outs of the pay war but did the players themselves still benefit ?
You guys will know Dorries more than me so he probably was coming in off his full run.
Well - maybe not so far off the mark...there'll be a few positions vacant.Nowhere near the level of delusion of Clarke saying he would make a comeback.
Also unsurprising given CA used everything within their PR capacity to make it seem like greedy, privileged cricketers wanting more. That's how a large proportion of people saw the dispute in 2017.Yeah the pay war wasn't about the pay of guys like Smith, Warner etc. It was about revenue-sharing ensuring funding for state level and women's cricket etc. Unsurprising that Dorries would attack the latter for spurious reasons though.
Emphasis on caught with this incident in mind- this was an admission. Ball tampering is illegal under the rules as stated by trying to gain an unfair advantage. Correctly or incorrectly, they did not see what they were doing as cheating, merely levelling the playing field. The fact that they came forward of their own accord rather than being caught is evidence of this. Their behaviour may have been misguided, but it wasn't entirely unprincipled- why not just accept the result instead of drawing attention to your actions if you are simply trying to cheat?crowe and pringle admitted to it after a game. the story goes they finally intercepted an old ball before a ball boy could get to it first during a test match in pakistan and it looked like it had spent some time in cameron bancrofts crotch so they experimented in the nets between tests then used bottle caps during the next test.
they got away free of charge because of the whole perceived new zealand fair play thing that was more prevalent in the early 90s than now.
Aus winning is the closest the British will ever get to winning it again.....It is clear what punishment should be for this outrage, Australia must be banned immediately
from the Eurovision Song Contest
Hold on, how does this work? "We did the same thing as obvious cheating, but we rationalised to ourselves that it wasn't cheating, so therefore it's less bad"?Emphasis on caught with this incident in mind- this was an admission. Ball tampering is illegal under the rules as stated by trying to gain an unfair advantage. Correctly or incorrectly, they did not see what they were doing as cheating, merely levelling the playing field. The fact that they came forward of their own accord rather than being caught is evidence of this. Their behaviour may have been misguided, but it wasn't entirely unprincipled- why not just accept the result instead of drawing attention to your actions if you are simply trying to cheat?
This is a surefire way to make sure the future response to any incident of this kind is just relentless denial, if "intent" is the critical thing and not the actual act.Australia were trying to gain an unfair advantage which is cheating in the ICC rulebook, and they knew it.
New Zealand did not see what they were doing as trying to gain an unfair advantage, so they were not trying to cheat. It may have still been reasonable to classify it as cheating, but it wasn't an attempt to gain unfair advantage.
Why sully the estimation of your own performance unless you are doing so on a matter of principle? If you act in accordance with principles, the tampering might still be wrong, but it is certainly better than this instance.
.
"I know from an Australian cricket perspective we hold our heads high. I'd be very disappointed if one of our team members did that and how they were reacting," Warner said.