Bad eggs

[C_C]

...but I bet you are dying to tell us though????

Yeah but my lips are sealed.

 

[SquidAU]

DO check before you shoot off yer mouth.

check this link

WI vs ENG ODI barbados May 5th 2004.

Looking at that list, everyone has copped it one way or another from the match referee. Even Kenya!

Ganguly's name is sure in there alot. And for 2 or 3 overs behind, not the 1 over alot of the others are.

 

[C_C]

Most on that list in 5 for Gangs and Vaughanny.
That match was in kolkata where heavy dew made the keeper come out and dump sawdust twice and bowlers stop a few dozen time to pick grass and slush outta their spikes.
What was Vaughan's excuse ?

i find this 'must finish in time' credo to be ludicrous given that sometimes some circumstances make the elongation of the game very much warranted.

 

[C_C]

Scally- can i expect a retraction from your for claiming that i fabricated the said matter ?

 

[superkingdave]

yeah, Vaughan has been fined 4 times btw

 

[Scaly piscine]

Most on that list in 5 for Gangs and Vaughanny.
That match was in kolkata where heavy dew made the keeper come out and dump sawdust twice and bowlers stop a few dozen time to pick grass and slush outta their spikes.
What was Vaughan's excuse ?

i find this 'must finish in time' credo to be ludicrous given that sometimes some circumstances make the elongation of the game very much warranted.

???

Vaughan is on it twice and one of those is for 1 over.

 

[superkingdave]

Most on that list in 5 for Gangs and Vaughanny.
That match was in kolkata where heavy dew made the keeper come out and dump sawdust twice and bowlers stop a few dozen time to pick grass and slush outta their spikes.
What was Vaughan's excuse ?

i find this 'must finish in time' credo to be ludicrous given that sometimes some circumstances make the elongation of the game very much warranted.

i think it was the champions trophy final, played in near pitch black conditions at the end

 

[C_C]

Surely pitchblack conditions shouldnt prevent you from finishing your overs...you aint slipping on nothing, the heat/cold isnt opressive to make you slow down etc......but anyways...point is, same offence, different treatment.

 

[superkingdave]

btw he's appealed so will play the 5th ODI

 

[Dasa]

One thing I find interesting about this thread is how the Asians obviously feel there is a bias, yet this is just dismissed by the non-Asians. Do none of you stop to think that perhaps we have a point? I mean, it's not like Asia (and the subcontinent in particular) has been treated that well by the white world in the past, could not some subconscious feelings remain? A lot of people may not want to admit it, but I'm sure a lot of you would judge an Asian player by a different standard to a non-Asian player... there is bias everywhere in the world. Even do some simple media analysis, and you'll find the incredible bias against all who are not white, middle-class males. We have a point, you know.

 

[superkingdave]

This is the second match in succession that India has not bowled its overs within the required timeframe and no excuse was offered by the captain

This may be the difference between what is listed on the website - which are breaches of the over rate, and the respective punishments handed out - the circumstances of the slow over rate and the words of the captain are taken in to account - Ganguly clearly had no excuse or he would have offered it.

 

[Scallywag]

DO check before you shoot off yer mouth.

check this link

WI vs ENG ODI barbados May 5th 2004.

Maybe you should because Ganguly has 4 offenses compared to Vaughan's 2.

Even though Ganguly was only cited on two of those and Vaughan one. Vaughan recieved no fine for the one in May because it was dismissed just like Ganguly recieved no fine against Aus in bris in January and against Pakistan in March.

Your claim that Vaughan should be banned like Ganguly holds no water because on your evidence Ganguly has offended 4 times as Vaughan's 2 times. And thats not including Gangulys 3 times in 05.

 

[maxpower]

I don't know about racism in ICC, but it would be naive to deny that racist remarks are made by players, or even some of the officals may have a racist bias. On the field I believe, be ready to recieve if you are gonna give (i.e mcgrath vs sarwan).

 

[Scallywag]

Australia.
Notice that Vaughan got fined only for his repeat offence in slow overrates while Ganguly got a 6 match ban for repeat offence....same violation different ruling. Consistency ?

I repeat that Vaughan did not get fined for slow over rates in May as it was squashed just like Ganguly did not get fined for slow over rates in Jan and Nov as it was squashed just like Vaughans. So please do tell how Ganguly has been treated differently to Vaughan.

 

[C_C]

Scally..i am waiting for the retraction where you claimed i was fabricating.

And kindly post the precise guidelines for multiple offences.

it is interesting how one gets fined AND banned ( open to appeal) for the same crime that one just gets fined for.

 

[Scallywag]

Scally..i am waiting for the retraction where you claimed i was fabricating.

And kindly post the precise guidelines for multiple offences.

it is interesting how one gets fined AND banned ( open to appeal) for the same crime that one just gets fined for.

I repeat Vaughan was only charged once in 2004 for slow over rates. If you look at the page you supplied it is simply over rate breeches and not the final charge.

I repeat that Vaughan was not found guilty of slow over rates in May 04.

If you look at the penalties imposed

http://www.icc-cricket.com/rules/penalties/2004.html

you will see that Vaughan was never fined or banned for slow over rates May in 04, you have simply shown that England were 1 over over without giving the reason why. The breech was dismissed because it was not the captains fault.

Ganguly was had charges dismissed twice in 04 because it was not the captains fault, you will notice that I have not included them in any of the charges I have put up in the list of reports.

 

[C_C]

I repeat that Vaughan was not found guilty of slow over rates in May 04.

Incorrect.

You can keep repeating as much as you want but that is wrong.
Vaughan was found GUILTY of slow over rates in May 04. He didnt have to pay any penalty for his sentence.

Being found guilty or not is totally different from what the punishment(if any) for the guilt will be.

The breech was dismissed because it was not the captains fault.

So when its vaughan, its not the captian's fault. But when its ganguly, its the captains fault ?

 

[Scaly piscine]

I can't believe that yet again some Asian fans are trying their damnedest to imply there's some racism involved in the Ganguly ban. The ICC is blatantly pro-Asian countries, it has even implied it itself with that 40% comment a while ago.

 

[social]

One thing I find interesting about this thread is how the Asians obviously feel there is a bias, yet this is just dismissed by the non-Asians. Do none of you stop to think that perhaps we have a point? I mean, it's not like Asia (and the subcontinent in particular) has been treated that well by the white world in the past, could not some subconscious feelings remain? A lot of people may not want to admit it, but I'm sure a lot of you would judge an Asian player by a different standard to a non-Asian player... there is bias everywhere in the world. Even do some simple media analysis, and you'll find the incredible bias against all who are not white, middle-class males. We have a point, you know.

On the other hand, there has been an argument mounted for some time that Asian countries are actually favoured by the ICC because of the revenue generated in that region.

For example, many felt that Murali was protected so as not to offend the Asian clique within the ICC (the decision to bow to Sri Lankan pressure and not appoint Darrell Hair to their games for a period was particularly disgraceful).

 

[C_C]

The ICC is blatantly pro-Asian countries,

That is a wrong assumption.
CEO is an aussie.
Historical precedent proves you wrong.