• 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.

Gavaskar on the Broads

Sir Alex

Sir Alex

Banned
zaremba said:
See the post I've just made. This part of the Law applies to the fielding team but not the batsman.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the correction. But even then I fail to see why it does not fall under first category "expressing disappointment with the umpires".
 
bagapath

bagapath

International Captain
Streetwise said:
You can see all the proof you want two posts up, are you man enough to appologise.:ph34r:
Click to expand...
Man, You are a pathetic liar. Where does it say Ganguly refused to attend the meeting? And where the F is the "anti-india bias" complaint from ganguly's supporters that you alleged?
 
S

Streetwise

Banned
bagapath said:
Man, You are a pathetic liar. Where does it say Ganguly refused to attend the meeting? And where the F is the "anti-india bias" complaint from ganguly's supporters that you alleged?
Click to expand...
Oh they were burning effifies of Braod to keep warm and pay homage to him then.:laugh:
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
You can't judge anything by effigies. They've burned Ganguly's effigies too. And Dhoni's. All except perhaps Tendulkar, and I'm not even sure about that.
 
S

Streetwise

Banned
bagapath said:
where does it say ganguly refused to attend the meeting?
Click to expand...
I can clearly remember when the incident happened the reason Broad gave Ganguly the highest possible punishment was because he didnt attend the hearing. When broad made the decision Ganguly was not there, I cant make it any clearer than that. I'm not forcing you to believe me and I'm not concerned enough to look for evidence of something I'm sure about. You can call me a liar and go on till the cows come home but I still remember what I remember.

You are quite welcome to put up your recollections and or proof,
 
bagapath

bagapath

International Captain
Streetwise said:
I can clearly remember when the incident happened the reason Broad gave Ganguly the highest possible punishment was because he didnt attend the hearing. When broad made the decision Ganguly was not there, I cant make it any clearer than that. I'm not forcing you to believe me and I'm not concerned enough to look for evidence of something I'm sure about. You can call me a liar and go on till the cows come home but I still remember what I remember.

You are quite welcome to put up your recollections and or proof,
Click to expand...
sure we will leave it at that. You remember what you remember. I think you are a liar. Fair enough.
 
Rant0r

Rant0r

International 12th Man
No way ? I seen effigy burning on TV and it looked like a billion participants, we need to get ACA on the job
 
Shri

Shri

Mr. Glass
Last edited:
vic_orthdox

vic_orthdox

Global Moderator
I remember a bit of a decree being sent towards the Australians, probably a bit after the turn of the century, to make sure that they always ask the umpire. McGrath and Lee were frowned upon a bit for premature celebrations, or charging towards the batsman in celebration and then turning around at the umpire to ask the question. Don't think there was ever an official warning over it.
 
Cruxdude

Cruxdude

International Debutant
"It had been a frustrating morning for us, I rapped the fella on the pad and I knew it was out straight away," said Broad. "But I get on really well with the umpire and I just said 'Rod, sorry about my mishap'. He just laughed it off.
Click to expand...
:laugh::laugh::laugh:

Sounds eerily like what Gavaskar said.
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
GeraintIsMyHero said:
Thanks four_or_six, obviously better at searching the interwebz than me

u finished washing your hair yet? :ph34r:



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.
Click to expand...
And who knows what went on in that discussion and why it was perceived to be so when we see people being banned for far less... Isn't that where the nepotism accusation comes in?
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
GeraintIsMyHero said:
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?
Click to expand...
nah.. they are Aussies.. And if you are so non-fussed about this, why bother about the people who think there MAY be some nepotims at work here...
 
honestbharani

honestbharani

Whatever it takes!!!
Streetwise said:
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.
Click to expand...
yep.. And Indians were right in getting Bucknor banned..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top