Harper lets Dhoni have it.

[Daemon]

Yes because posting on the internet means you have no lives obviously.

 

[honestbharani]

Yes. Because the Cricket Web posters who wade into threads of this kind with gusto are the pits. And, somewhat unsurprisingly, they are the ones who do not have much else to do with their lives - as a brief perusal of the post count would reveal.

you are saying this to a man with almost 25K posts here..

 

[ankitj]

Slightly ironic that you should be talking about "evidence" and yet

1. You suggest the conversation might not have happened the way Harper alleges because of "the looks of" what we did or didn't happen to see (without the benefit of sound) on the TV;

Yes, I am surprised that you don't consider this an important piece of potential evidence at all. If the "intimidating" dialogue lasted for more than 15 seconds, the cameras would have focussed on the two. But from our collective memory they didn't. So I think it is unlikely (though not impossible) that there was any real intimidation in the dialogue. Don't tell me that you find this line of reasoning shocking.

2. One party to the exchange - who we may presume did, unlike us, actually hear what was said - has given his account of what took place

Well, his whole statement is so full of...err victim mentality. It's not difficult for someone to mis-interpret or exaggerate the events if he is aggrieved. For example, I tell a co-worker something like "I told you this before" by which I might only be trying to remind him of an old conversation while if he feels slighted for whatever reasons, he might construe it as questioning his ability. Why is it such an impossibility that Harper is colouring up his narrative (not completely making up possibly) !

3. The other party to the exchange hasn't denied it.

Can't be bothered. Too petty. That's how Dhoni could be thinking. Can you take lack of denial as a stronger "evidence" than the fact the cameras, commentators and viewers didn't pick any prolonged argument between the two? I know which one I will take,

If we're talking about "evidence", then, so far it all points one way. Now that might change. But this assumption that umpires are liars (and, as some would have it, biased against sub-continental teams) is both corrosive, unfair and downright tedious.

Not my assumption. Someone else's might be, I don't know. We are talking about one umpire, not umpires, anyway. You are generalizing quite blatantly.

My view, fwiw, is that it may well have happened; that Dhoni can suck up a bit of criticism for it; that it's not a hanging offence by any means; and a big fat lol to those who have been telling themselves that Ricky Ponting gets away without equivalent criticism (on CW or elsewhere) when he does similar things.

My view fwiw, this seems unlikely to have happened because of (a) lack of having seen anything noticeable on field and (b) Dhoni's past record of being generally calm in heated situations (no amount of wishful thinking can change that). And if it did happen, I agree this not a hanging offence, but certainly condemnable and a bigger deal than the post-match comment. And I don't see why you bring up Ponting in response to my post. I did not mention him, can't be bothered to.

 

[FaaipDeOiad]

God, CC has gotten really bad lately. What an awful thread full of awful posts.

 

[smash84]

Just saw that one too
Was hitting him way outside off and turning away too.

How the hell did teams manage to win away in those days? Pakistan had similar problems in England with a certain David Constant and kept complaining about it, while gavaskar lost his cool famously in Australia due to dodgy umpiring.

Yeah Pakistan had serious problems with David Constant and had even appealed to the ECB back then that they did not want Constant to officiate in their series but the ECB constantly put Constant in the matches

Yeah, that decision even though he may edged it, wasn't that bad and it had kept low.
But the allegation was that the umpires had been favoring the home side all series and he got frustrated in the end.Rex Whitehead was the umpire in question who had been dodgy all series.
Similar to the problems Imran Khan alleged there earlier too and later Javed Miandad reading about it.

Favoring the home side happened in almost every country in every tour those days(happened in India,Australia,England too) by the umpires and allegations and counter allegations were made. Wasn't it Pakistan though that introduced neutral umpires for the first time after Imran advocated it?

Btw, a bit of a ironical and interesting trivia: home teams have fared better since the introduction of a neutral umpire, with a win-loss ratio of 1.57:1 compared to 1.43:1 before.

Yep. Imran got tired of all the blame game and decided that neutral umpires was the best way forward. To his credit he did that when he was captain first against the WI and then against India. Big step to bring neutral umpires in a series against India.

 

[smash84]

Yeah until the hawkeye that looked good, not a shocker at all.

This is a shocker

‪"THE" WORST UMPIRE OF ALL TIME- 2 PLUMB LBW's NOT GIVEN IN PAKISTAN 1998- MCGRATH‬‏ - YouTube

‪BRIAN LARA TERRIBLE LBW DECISION- VENKAT THE CULPRIT! 2003 vs Australia‬‏ - YouTube

‪WORST LBW DECISION EVER - Greg Blewett facing Mushtaq Ahmed 1999‬‏ - YouTube

‪WORST LBW DECISION- PLUMB! another one! Justin Langer vs New Zealand 2001‬‏ - YouTube

wow........terrible umpiring not to give those 2 McGrath lbws.......also the mushy wicket is so damn pathetic umpiring

 

[vcs]

Yeah Pakistan had serious problems with David Constant and had even appealed to the ECB back then that they did not want Constant to officiate in their series but the ECB constantly put Constant in the matches



Yep. Imran got tired of all the blame game and decided that neutral umpires was the best way forward. To his credit he did that when he was captain first against the WI and then against India. Big step to bring neutral umpires in a series against India.

Yep, there's nothing worse than an umpire having variable standards for both teams.

 

[GIMH]

Yes. Because the Cricket Web posters who wade into threads of this kind with gusto are the pits. And, somewhat unsurprisingly, they are the ones who do not have much else to do with their lives - as a brief perusal of the post count would reveal.

I don't know why you come to this forum, half your posts seem to be complaining about it.

As for a high post count indicating someone has nothing much else to do with their lives, that's laughable.

 

[PhoenixFire]

Mr Z right on the money for mine.

 

[BoyBrumby]

(1) Innocent unless proven guilty when we are talking about someone who has no history of offence
(2) Dhoni has no history of offence

Which one of the above two you or others disagree with? Someone like Sreesanth or Kohli would fail on (2)

I find it odd some Indian fans are taking up cudgels on Dhoni's behalf when he has made no effort to suggest Harper is lying. If Dhoni was disputing Harper's version I could understand it, but intimating mendacity on the latter's part is a massive stretch.

Surely you see the irony in suggesting this:

Can't be bothered. Too petty. That's how Dhoni could be thinking.

as a reason for Dhoni not publically responding?

Let's suppose your suggestion is correct for the sake of argument. If Dhoni considers it a "petty" matter, why are you so keen to read malign intent into Harper's statement?

You can't have it both ways. It's either too insignificant to matter or so important an experienced official has run the very real risk of opening himself up to libel action.

As for your second point, I remember Dhoni disputing Ian Bell's NO being upheld after he'd referred it to UDRS in the world cup game between India and England. IIRC Dave Richardson passed comment on Dhoni's criticism too.

Dhoni had a good case the wrong decision was made then, but I don't think there's any suggestion that he didn't have a good case for some of Harper's calls in the first test either.

 

[ankitj]

BoyBrumby, There is no irony. It might be a petty thing for Dhoni as an accused party if it is exaggeration and foul cry from Harper. Why I am arguing has nothing to do with how Dhoni might be reacting. I am arguing because of comments here like real Dhoni is exposed.

That's that. That is not the issue. That's an unnecessary diversion. Coming to your point about Dhoni expressing displeasure at DRS review of Bell, he was not being aggressive or employing intimidation in that case too. Basically you'd struggle to find one clip on YouTube showing Dhoni sledging or being aggressive towards any player, let alone umpire. That kind of past record makes it less likely that it may have happened. Yet funnily people are in a hurry to proclaim that real Dhoni is exposed. You don't find that strange?

EDIT: fixed based on what Centurymaker pointed out.

 

[centurymaker]

BoyBrumby, There is no irony. It would be a petty thing for Dhoni as an accused party if it is exaggeration and foul cry from Harper. Why I am arguing has nothing to do with how Dhoni might be reacting. I am arguing because of comments here like real Dhoni is exposed.

That's that. That is not the issue. That's an unnecessary diversion. Coming to your point about Dhoni expressing displeasure at DRS review of Bell, he WAS NOT being aggressive or employing intimidation in that case too. Basically you'd struggle to find one clip on YouTube showing Dhoni sledging or being aggressive towards any player, let alone umpire. That kind of past record makes it less likely that it may have happened. Yet funnily people are in a hurry tpo ptoclaim that real Dhoni is exposed. You don't find that strange?

fixed

 

[BoyBrumby]

BoyBrumby, There is no irony. It would be a petty thing for Dhoni as an accused party if it is exaggeration and foul cry from Harper. Why I am arguing has nothing to do with how Dhoni might be reacting. I am arguing because of comments here like real Dhoni is exposed.

That's that. That is not the issue. That's an unnecessary diversion. Coming to your point about Dhoni expressing displeasure at DRS review of Bell, he was being aggressive or employing intimidation in that case too. Basically you'd struggle to find one clip on YouTube showing Dhoni sledging or being aggressive towards any player, let alone umpire. That kind of past record makes it less likely that it may have happened. Yet funnily people are in a hurry tpo ptoclaim that real Dhoni is exposed. You don't find that strange?

I don't think I did suggest the "real" Dhoni has been exposed. In fact I said:

No, but the balance of probabilities based on the evidence set before the public all points to Dhoni actually having said it.

I don't get why so many Indian fans are at such pains to suggest otherwise. He's not the first captain to say something critical and he won't be the last.

I actually don't consider it a massive issue in the grand scheme of the sport; Dhoni was wrong here, as other captains have been in the past. What I struggle with is the rush from some quarters to accuse Harper of lying. Dhoni's baldly criticised Harper in a press conference he knew would be reported, how is it then less likely he'd say something on the field where there was a fair chance it wouldn't be recorded or reported? That's a rhetorical question, by the way; as Dhoni doesn't seem mentally deficient, it isn't.

You must see the incongruity between an accusation of Harper lying and the suggestion Dhoni hasn't responded because he considers it "petty"?

 

[Nate]

Yes. Because the Cricket Web posters who wade into threads of this kind with gusto are the pits. And, somewhat unsurprisingly, they are the ones who do not have much else to do with their lives - as a brief perusal of the post count would reveal.

They're entitled to spend their time as they please.

 

[ankitj]

You must see the incongruity between an accusation of Harper lying and the suggestion Dhoni hasn't responded because he considers it "petty"?

This is such a moot point. Dhoni thinking this is petty because he might know nothing so bad happened is completely different from me trying to argue that it's actually more likely that nothing so bad may have happened. Don't think it's worth spending more time on it.

And yes, you may not have said Dhoni has been exposed but many posters have directly or indirectly suggested that. See the last post on page 4 of the thread. This when no one who saw the match saw any prolonged argument between the captain and the umpire. Don't blame me for inferring that people are too eager to bash Dhoni despite no evidence of the said offence and no history in past of similar offences.

 

[Top_Cat]

Honestly, I don't think what we saw from the boundary is much of a guide either. When Mick Slater apparently lost his chops at Dravid years ago, fans lost their **** at what was, to the naked eye, Slats abusing both Dravid and the umpire. Despite appearances, though, no umpire cited him and Slats was only fined when he spoke publically about it on a radio show. Either people were far more tolerant of abuse 10 years ago, a charge I think unlikely considering Venkat was the umpire on the receiving end, or there was less to what Slats said than appearances suggested.

Sometimes appearances can be deceiving, context matters, etc.

 

[Borges]

And, somewhat unsurprisingly, they are the ones who do not have much else to do with their lives - as a brief perusal of the post count would reveal.

That was a needless comment, utterly lacking in grace and calculated to offend.

I made a mistake and I'm sorry. I apologize to everyone who felt offended by it.

 

[vcs]

Honestly, I don't think what we saw from the boundary is much of a guide either. When Mick Slater apparently lost his chops at Dravid years ago, fans lost their **** at what was, to the naked eye, Slats abusing both Dravid and the umpire. Despite appearances, though, no umpire cited him and Slats was only fined when he spoke publically about it on a radio show. Either people were far more tolerant of abuse 10 years ago, a charge I think unlikely considering Venkat was the umpire on the receiving end, or there was less to what Slats said than appearances suggested.

Sometimes appearances can be deceiving, context matters, etc.

Yeah that Slater incident really looks awful. Can't believe he didn't get fined for it. NZ players having a go at some of the Saffers in the recent WC was also pretty bad. In general though, we do set high standards for behaviour when it comes to judging cricketers (perhaps even higher nowadays), hence the big deal about Ponting and Prior breaking stuff in the dressing room recently. Dhoni is also being held up to a similar standard here.

 

[smash84]

yeah the standards have gone up nowadays........I remember Wasim Akram recalling how Viv came outside the Pakistan dressing room and threatened Wasim. You would probably get suspended for a match or two in this era

 

[smash84]

Here it is as Akram narrated it

Dubai: Can you guess what happened when Wasim Akram, the "Sultan of Swing" sledged "King" Viv Richards during a Test match?
Akram narrated the incident during the recent Shyam Bhatia awards for UAE's outstanding performers in domestic cricket.
"I was only nineteen when I played in the 1988 Barbados Test match during the tour of West Indies. It was in this Test match that I realised I've got the pace to disturb the batsmen," he said.
"When only 45 minutes were left to go for close of play, Richards came out to bat. My skipper Imran Khan gave me the ball and asked me to have a go.
"I bowled a bouncer at Richards and his cap fell while avoiding it. I went up to him and abused him. I was very skinny at that time and he looked at me and said: 'I will see [you] out man.'"
Akram immediately went to Imran Khan and related the incident.
"Imran told me to go ahead and scare &. him. So I bowled another bouncer and his cap fell again and so I went up to him and with a lot of action, provoked him.
"Richards looked at me and spat to the side with contempt. That was a time when there were no match referees nor close up television," he said.
Khan asked Akram to bowl the last over of the day.
"I bowled a bouncer again and then returned to the dressing room. While removing my shoes, the room attendant said that someone is waiting for me outside the dressing room.
"When I went out, I saw Richards in only his pad and no shirt and with a bat in hand. I ran to Imran and told him about it, but he quietly said: 'it is better you handle him.' I was shocked and so I went and told Richards very politely that I am sorry for what happened & and [that] it won't happen again.
"Richards looked at me and said: "If it happens next time, I will kill you.
"It never happened again," said Akram.

gulfnews : Sledging Richards backfired on me, Akram reveals