Gavaskar on the Broads

[Sanz]

No he didnt, You cant change history Sanz.

I will let the readers decide who is changing the history here :-

India to appeal Ganguly ban | Cricket News | Global | Cricinfo.com

""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,..I made Ganguly aware of the potential penalties at the previous hearing and it is unfortunate that this warning was not heeded." - Chris Broad.


At a hearing conducted at the ground at the end of the game Ganguly was penalised and as this is his second breach of this provision within 12 months, the penalty is automatically upgraded from Level 2 to a Level 3 breach under the ICC Code.

 

[Sir Alex]

Hahaha is that an egg you are wearing, it looks nice.

You still have not proved what you said, liar.

 

[Streetwise]

I will let the readers decide who is changing the history here :-

India to appeal Ganguly ban | Cricket News | Global | Cricinfo.com

""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,..I made Ganguly aware of the potential penalties at the previous hearing and it is unfortunate that this warning was not heeded." - Chris Broad.


At a hearing conducted at the ground at the end of the game Ganguly was penalised and as this is his second breach of this provision within 12 months, the penalty is automatically upgraded from Level 2 to a Level 3 breach under the ICC Code.

No excuses offered
He was warned at the previous hearing
A hearing was conducted

Dont stress yourself over this Sanz, I remember the incident and you dont. You want to call me a liar and I'm not fussed by that, you have a right to express yourself.

 

[Streetwise]

You still have not proved what you said, liar.

Eat my shorts.

 

[Streetwise]

Sorry I didnt bookmark all the girls I ****ed then but if you had of read my post I did say it was from memory and if you look up the details you will find your answer. If you believe it or not wont change anything. I remember the incident and dont need to prove anything.

But I believe you, nobody is doubting you.

 

[Sir Alex]

Eat my shorts.

Still a liar. Liar, Liar, Liar.

 

[Shri]

But I believe you, nobody is doubting you.

That should help me sleep well tonight. Thanks man.

 

[Jono]

****ing hell.

 

[zaremba]

For the people disagreeing with Sunil Gavaskar (and fair enough), are you going to add why you think Broad has not been treated differently?

It's one thing to perceive different treatment. It's another thing altogether to leap to the conclusion that it's some kind of nepotist conspiracy.

 

[four_or_six]

Stuart Broad (England) - West Indies v England, 8 March 2009, Queens Park Oval, Trinidad

Level 1 breach of code 1.7 - Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or mathc official.

Alan Hurst

---

Stuart Broad - England v West Indies, 2nd ODI, 4 July 2007 at Edgbaston

Level 1 breach of code 1.1 - Breach of the Logo Policy – Official Reprimand

Mike Procter


From ICC records

Yeah, Stuart Broad would never get reported for anything. The match referees are obviously biased, sack the lot of them.

 

[Sir Alex]

Stuart Broad (England) - West Indies v England, 8 March 2009, Queens Park Oval, Trinidad

Level 1 breach of code 1.7 - Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or mathc official.

Alan Hurst

---

Stuart Broad - England v West Indies, 2nd ODI, 4 July 2007 at Edgbaston

Level 1 breach of code 1.1 - Breach of the Logo Policy – Official Reprimand

Mike Procter


From ICC records

Yeah, Stuart Broad would never get reported for anything. The match referees are obviously biased, sack the lot of them.

He still gets reported under Sec 1. Also for repeat offense he not even reprimanded. The latest incident involving umpire dissent was completely ignored which considering it is his second offence is inexplicable and inexcusable.

 

[GIMH]

Stuart Broad (England) - West Indies v England, 8 March 2009, Queens Park Oval, Trinidad

Level 1 breach of code 1.7 - Public criticism of, or inappropriate comment on a match related incident or mathc official.

Alan Hurst

---

Stuart Broad - England v West Indies, 2nd ODI, 4 July 2007 at Edgbaston

Level 1 breach of code 1.1 - Breach of the Logo Policy – Official Reprimand

Mike Procter


From ICC records

Yeah, Stuart Broad would never get reported for anything. The match referees are obviously biased, sack the lot of them.

Thanks four_or_six, obviously better at searching the interwebz than me

u finished washing your hair yet?

He still gets reported under Sec 1. Also for repeat offense he not even reprimanded. The latest incident involving umpire dissent was completely ignored which considering it is his second offence is inexplicable and inexcusable.

Or rather, it was deemed not to be an offence at all. Perhaps they decided it wasn't umpire dissent but rather that he was making a complaint against his opponent? I'd agree that he shouldn't have behaved like that, but he was called into the referee's office for a discussion.

 

[four_or_six]

Thanks four_or_six, obviously better at searching the interwebz than me

u finished washing your hair yet?

Have always found it to be a useful site, bookmarked it a while ago.

lol, no.

 

[Sir Alex]

Or rather, it was deemed not to be an offence at all. Perhaps they decided it wasn't umpire dissent but rather that he was making a complaint against his opponent? I'd agree that he shouldn't have behaved like that, but he was called into the referee's office for a discussion.

Considering it was not actioned upon, it is obvious that it was not deemed an offence by the officials which is what is contemptible. There is no doubt among even ardent followers of Broad that he indeed crossed a line in that exchange. That whether he was justified is of no relevance here. He has also been noticed several times glaring/reasoning with umpires whenever a wide or a decision went against him while bowling. So all these coupled with his non-booking is what irksome and giving fodder for guys like Gavaskar to rant on. It is high time the conduct of match referees was standardised.

 

[GIMH]

Seem to remember some dissent from Ricky Ponting at Cardiff, is his dad a match referee as well? Suppose Shane Warne's Aunty Brenda was on the committee as well.

People getting all pissy about something not being deemed an offence is just tragic, haven't you got anything better to complain about?

 

[four_or_six]

Loads of things that are a bit dodgy don't get reported, from any number of players, that's nothing to do with Stuart Broad being Chris Broad's son. And thank goodness for that, otherwise we'd have 22 corporate-imaged Michael Clarke's out on the field and that would be dull as.

 

[Sir Alex]

Seem to remember some dissent from Ricky Ponting at Cardiff, is his dad a match referee as well? Suppose Shane Warne's Aunty Brenda was on the committee as well.

People getting all pissy about something not being deemed an offence is just tragic, haven't you got anything better to complain about?

It is not quite apt to compare Ricky's antics with Broad's because in Broad's case the frequency of such dissents is much more. Secondly, I don't think it is blatant nepotism on part of the umpires to not book Broad, but there is no doubt he and Watson are indeed getting off lightly which points to inefficiency of the match referees and officials including umpires. The reason behind that inefficiency could be anything out of which only one is nepotism. Gavaskar is right in saying Broad is getting the petpat of the officials but whether nepotism is behind that may or may not be true. The former is what needs to be taken seriously while the latter is just sensationalist garbage to spice up / attract attention.

 

[Sir Alex]

Loads of things that are a bit dodgy don't get reported, from any number of players, that's nothing to do with Stuart Broad being Chris Broad's son. And thank goodness for that, otherwise we'd have 22 corporate-imaged Michael Clarke's out on the field and that would be dull as.

Either don't report anything or report everything. There cannot be different laws for different people and inconsistencies in delving out punishments.

 

[Streetwise]

Loads of things that are a bit dodgy don't get reported, from any number of players, that's nothing to do with Stuart Broad being Chris Broad's son. And thank goodness for that, otherwise we'd have 22 corporate-imaged Michael Clarke's out on the field and that would be dull as.

But at least the quality of cricket would improve.

 

[Streetwise]

Either don't report anything or report everything. There cannot be different laws for different people and inconsistencies in delving out punishments.

Perceprtion is a big factor, If Dar felt that Broad needed to be reported he would have. But according to the man who was there and knows what Broad jr said believes it was not a reportable offence. What proof do you have to suggest that Dar thought Broad jr went over the top but did nothing be3cause it was Broad sr's son.