Ganguly gives Bucknor a Rating of very poor

[Pratters]

by luckyeddie

For shame, those of you accusing Bucknor of 'taking money'.

Dude I did not say Bucknor takes money. Chill a bit on that. Just made me wonder about it.

And yes, the irresponsible journalism is pretty evident. Really strange how every one has the same news without quoting any one.

 

[luckyeddie]

by luckyeddie



Dude I did not say Bucknor takes money. Chill a bit on that. Just made me wonder about it.

And yes, the irresponsible journalism is pretty evident. Really strange how every one has the same news without quoting any one.

I'm cool8D

The case that springs to mind is to remain anonymous (let's just call them the 'Daily Stellar Object') who last week published a comedy article, purporting to be original, in their newspaper.

The following may or may not have happened (yeah, right)

It is alleged that the same article (citing a ficticious magazine, the contents of which the duck would have been proud of) appeared on a website a few months ago and was reprobuced without permission or accreditation.

To compound the matter, it was then syndicated around the world, accredited to the Daily Star (oops).

The original writer highlighted these misdemeanours on his website - and a number of people (myself included) contacted the, er, newspaper (term applied loosely) concerned for an explanation.

The editor said "It's on the internet, therefore it's up for grabs. Copyright doesn't apply on the internet."

As I said, it may not have happened.

A further example is the Sunday Express claiming that the recent totally sickening 'article' by Robert Kilroy-Silk was not defamatory, and that they stand by it.

Funnily enough, both newspapers share the same owner (who also owns 'Big and Bouncy', 'Asian Babes' and so on).

I share your utter contempt for much journalism.

Rant over.

 

[Legglancer]

Arjuna Ranatunga has mentioned in an interviwe some time ago that Its about time for India to have a captain who in not neccesarily a "Mr. nice guy". He has mentioned that he likes Ganguly's style and he should get more cooperation and controle instead if criticisem.

 

[marc71178]

Hang on, Ganguly was asked to rate Bucknor, and he did.

Yes, but how did that rating get into the public eye - that is deplorable IMO.

I love the fact everyone hates Ganguly, it makes him that much of a better captain.

You mean if we start liking him, he'll actually become a worse captain? :wow:

 

[marc71178]

Can you give any instances of RESPONSIBLE journalism in the cricket media recently?

Easy!

 

[bennyr]

The other day on Cricket Show on ESPN , Bhogle asked him how do you cope up with being the most hated Indian player abroad and he replied in his typical style saying that he doesn't give a damn to what others think of him as long as his own players respect him. He also added that as this series moved on he noticed a change in the Aussies towards him and that they started respecting him more. Is it b'coz the Aussies notice an Aussie type attitude in him?

I would reckon Ganguly is getting more respect in Australia for exactly that reason. On the whole, I thought the tactical captaincy (on both sides) during the test series was awful, but in terms of leadership, my respect for Ganguly grew enormously - he is an excellent leader who speaks his mind (and like most Aussies, I like that).

Ganguly is probably getting even more respect from Australians for the excellent spirit in which the series was played.

 

[Slow Love™]

My father, who hardly ever watches test cricket, watched a bit of the etst match from Sydney and in 15 minutes made this judgement - 'This umpire has taken money' Its not some thing I thought of Bucknor but to think of it, Bucknor is such a good umpire. How could he have missed such calls? Maybe he had taken money. The decisions were certainly biost against India.

Just an unimportant nitpick, but the question has to be asked - if your father hardly ever watches test cricket, how on earth would he be able to tell if an umpire has taken money, particularly after 15 minutes?

Aside from this... My opinion is that Ganguly's rating seems fairly appropriate to me, if it's true and it's not a made-up story. Anybody watching who was not an utterly one-eyed Aussie supporter would say that he had a rotten series.

What surprised me most was how oddly demonstrative he was - motioning sternly to players, snapping, complaining that he couldn't make decisions because the bowler was in his way during appeals... I wondered if he was going a little funny, or if his wife had just left him or something.

Incidentally, on the "irresponsible journalism" issue - much of the sports news online (it's not quite as loose in the TV or print media) around the world seems to come out of only one or two outlets, and then gets repeated everywhere. So if there's a factual mistake, or a hoax report, almost everybody reports it. This applies to more general news also. Frightening, when you think about it.

Worst story I've seen: when Murray Goodwin made controversial comments about Zimbabwe's team selections being race based, and said "It sounds really racist, but it's the truth and that's a sad state of affairs because these guys don't have to perform as well as the European guys to get a game."

The quote was wrongly attributed to Steve Waugh by a news agency, and this was repeated around the world in many online newspapers. The worst instance was in the India Telegraph, where the quote was accompanied by a picture of Waugh, with the caption "Racist, but true, says Steve Waugh".

The fact checking by the majority of outlets out there is abysmal. If they've seen it printed anywhere else, they'll print it.

 

[Pratters]

Just an unimportant nitpick, but the question has to be asked - if your father hardly ever watches test cricket, how on earth would he be able to tell if an umpire has taken money, particularly after 15 minutes? Aside from this... My opinion is that Ganguly's rating seems fairly appropriate to me, if it's true and it's not a made-up story. Anybody watching who was not an utterly one-eyed Aussie supporter would say that he had a rotten series.

He cant. It was an offhand comment by him.

Regarding the question og Ganguly reporting negative against
Bucknor, while it is Ganguly's prerogattive on what rating he gives, (which most people do believe should have been poor), there is no way any news paper can say what rating he actually did give to Bucknor.

 

[V Reddy]

He cant. It was an offhand comment by him.

Regarding the question og Ganguly reporting negative against
Bucknor, while it is Ganguly's prerogattive on what rating he gives, (which most people do believe should have been poor), there is no way any news paper can say what rating he actually did give to Bucknor.

It may have been leaked :rolleyes: . Some of those reports turn out to be wrong but most of these gossips turn out to be correct. I read a week back that the team management had asked for a medium pacer instead of Kaif but the selectors sent Rohan Gavaskar and in the same report it quoted an anonmous indian player as saying that they will call for Bhandari. Now they have called for him.

 

[Rik]

I would reckon Ganguly is getting more respect in Australia for exactly that reason. On the whole, I thought the tactical captaincy (on both sides) during the test series was awful, but in terms of leadership, my respect for Ganguly grew enormously - he is an excellent leader who speaks his mind (and like most Aussies, I like that).

Ganguly is probably getting even more respect from Australians for the excellent spirit in which the series was played.

That's the problem, his tactical awareness is non-existant. He's technically an appauling captain. He rarely contributes except in ODIs with bat or ball. But his ability to wind the opposition up seems to push his team that bit further. I'm quite sure though, that if they picked someone who had a clue about fields or bowling changes, they would win more. At the moment either the batting fires and India win, or they spend day upon day upon dayin the field whilst Ganguly shows exactly why Simon Hughes once remarked "...most of them are just as confused about why Ganguly is captain of India" in a ODI when England toured a few years ago.

 

[Shane Warne]

My father, who hardly ever watches test cricket, watched a bit of the etst match from Sydney and in 15 minutes made this judgement - 'This umpire has taken money' Its not some thing I thought of Bucknor but to think of it, Bucknor is such a good umpire. How could he have missed such calls? Maybe he had taken money. The decisions were certainly biost against India.

libelous

 

[bennyr]

That's the problem, his tactical awareness is non-existant. He's technically an appauling captain. He rarely contributes except in ODIs with bat or ball. But his ability to wind the opposition up seems to push his team that bit further. I'm quite sure though, that if they picked someone who had a clue about fields or bowling changes, they would win more. At the moment either the batting fires and India win, or they spend day upon day upon dayin the field whilst Ganguly shows exactly why Simon Hughes once remarked "...most of them are just as confused about why Ganguly is captain of India" in a ODI when England toured a few years ago.

I would think that this raises as many questions about John Wright as Ganguly. I don't for a minute defend his fields or bowling changes, but surely Wright's job is to improve the situation, and this isn't happening.

 

[Pratters]

libelous

Not really when you consider the kinds of off hand statements people are known to be made :P

 

[biased indian]

well he can give him whatever rating he wants, he is still for me one of the best umpires going around, so he made 1 or 2 mistakes recently, so what, everyone does

its easy for u say india was the one who sufferd

 

[Neil Pickup]

its easy for u say india was the one who sufferd

And no other teams have ever been victims of officials' mistakes.