ICC ranks Hair second best

[social]

There's obviously a huge difference between the two. The fact that you can't see the difference is just....well never mind.

Yep - penalised once and WARNED nine (that's 10 - 1, 8 + 1, 11 - 2, etc, etc, etc) times in 16 months all bar once under the captaincy of the same guy

What a freakin joke!

Remind me again how ball tampering affects Pakistan's national sensitivities!

 

[social]

Unfair.

Dont worry about it - I'm white and have learnt to live with discrimination from the likes of C_C

 

[Poker Boy]

Another interesting development. Hair voted Umpire of the Year by readers of Wisden... The accolades just keep coming!

http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,20767023-23212,00.html

I read that magaxine (but haven't got the latest copy yet) and I'm surprised because that doesn't reflect the press coverage that the Hair affair got here. The English press was generally pro-Pakistan (which as anyone who remembers 1992 will know is not a thing that generally happens) and Hair copped a lot of flack in the press at the inquiry from the likes of Boycott, Atherton and Simon Hughes. The only theory I have is that the voters might be a certain type of "tradditonal" cricket fan who believes that the umpire's decisison is final. Mind you its good publicity for the WC - probably the most publicity a cricket magazine will get here since Wisden Cricket Monthly published Robert Henderson's "Is it in the blood?" in 1995 - which was a total disaster for WCM as they had to settle out of court with Malcolm, DeFreitas and Chris Lewis.

 

[C_C]

Check the figures - Wisden magazine is nothing more than an idle curiosity in Australia as a WORLDWIDE circulation figure of 34000 would attest

Hair has been on the elite panel since its inception meaning that he has been near the top of the ICC's rankings for over 10 years

I realise that facts are not your greatest strength but at least try to make it easier than this

Tickets, please!

As usual, your 'facts' prove nothing - being on elite umpiring list is not implicit to being an elite umpire. Mr 'incompetent' Hair is an attestment to that.
And as i said (and i noticed nobody bothered replying to it) - there is no credible basis on concluding which umpire is performing well and which one isnt.

 

[C_C]

Dont worry about it - I'm white and have learnt to live with discrimination from the likes of C_C

What you havnt learnt is why exactly YOU get discriminated against as opposed to whites like Slow_love etc etc.
He has the sense to acknowledge the past crimes of your nation and present a corrective face.
You on the other hand show baseless indignation because you seek to shed your cultural responsibility.

 

[C_C]

Unfair.

Not at all.
His posts have a distinct pattern to it - diss anything non-white ( i am yet to see him take the side of a non-white in any issue) and deny/distort historical facts simply because he doesnt want to bear the social responsibility of the actions and repurcussions of his generation or older generations.

 

[PY]

You do yourself an injustice, you're sounding like BhupenderSingh.

Don't call people retards on here because they have a different opinion to yourself, it's not on and you should know it.

 

[social]

As usual, your 'facts' prove nothing - being on elite umpiring list is not implicit to being an elite umpire. Mr 'incompetent' Hair is an attestment to that.
And as i said (and i noticed nobody bothered replying to it) - there is no credible basis on concluding which umpire is performing well and which one isnt.

No-one replied because the statement was nonsense - again I refer you to the assessment criteria applied by the ICC

 

[C_C]

No-one replied because the statement was nonsense - again I refer you to the assessment criteria applied by the ICC

Which are what ?
I am yet to see any assessment criteria myself that is credible and not 'opinions'.
There is no credible, independently verifiable and logical basis on evaluating umpires.
Its all 'he says, she says' stuff. Whopee ding. As if that isnt seriously clouded by the politics of ICC and players associations.
It is absolutely unscientific and therefore, has no credibility.

 

[social]

Not at all.
His posts have a distinct pattern to it - diss anything non-white ( i am yet to see him take the side of a non-white in any issue) and deny/distort historical facts simply because he doesnt want to bear the social responsibility of the actions and repurcussions of his generation or older generations.

Excuse me for paying little heed to someone whose exposure to my country is limited to a chance encounter with tourists outside a ticket window in a country thousands of ks away but nonetheless professes to be an expert in all social, political and economic matters pertaining to Australia.

If it wasnt for the fact your brand of "logic" (generally found on a card inside a cereal box btw) was mildy amusing at times, I'd dismiss it as the naive ramblings of a child with over-indulgent parents.

Unfortunately, your response to every losing argument is the race card. - that's a sorry indictment on your character

 

[C_C]

Excuse me for paying little heed to someone whose exposure to my country is limited to a chance encounter with tourists outside a ticket window in a country thousands of ks away but nonetheless professes to be an expert in all social, political and economic matters pertaining to Australia.

If it wasnt for the fact your brand of "logic" (generally found on a card inside a cereal box btw) was mildy amusing at times, I'd dismiss it as the naive ramblings of a child with over-indulgent parents.

No, i dont respond to everything with the race card- just when it comes to some issues pertaining to your nation, given the sad precedence.I have not commented on anything that is political or economic matter pertaining to Australia and the social issues i've addressed are common knowledge - your treatment of the aboriginals, the distinct presence of racism in your country and a totally 'white dominated' sporting scene despite significant immigration to your nation.
You respond to all this by bringing up 'caste' issues which ludicrously misses the point - the issues of your country's effects are on an international sphere- as racism and discrimination of multicultural communities are. Its not an internal matter that doesnt affect foreigners and therefore, i do have every right to comment on the well known brand of racism comming out of your country. As per my 'brand of logic', well i am an accredited registered professional in a field that requires logic and science, unlike you. So i suggest you put a lid on it.

Unfortunately, your response to every losing argument is the race card. - that's a sorry indictment on your character

Err no. It is a sorry indictment of your nation, given the history and precedence. You have an obligation as a citizen of your nation to not ignore or gloss over the issues which you tend to do- which is precisely the reason you are the type that is picked on and not everyone else simply coz they'r white. Despite your ramblings, the proof is in the pudding. Actions speak louder than words and so far, your actions are all in accordance with closet white-superiority perspective and i am yet to see you speak out ever against the conduct of your nation- instead you defend it both historically and currently.
You pander to the 'asians vs us' mentality, which is not just inaccurate but highly hypocritical given the overwhelming historical precedence in dealings with your nation. You dont realise that its your mentality (the closet white supremist) that is part of the problem here - all your debates are geared towards casting a better light to white teams and people at the expense of others, on the back of revisionist history.
Such as Ganguly vs Aussie team ( missing the point that if the system itself is flawed and biassed, quoting disciplinary record is irrelevant), to Kerry Packer vs Dalmiya, to Hair vs Pakistani team etc etc.
Oh and as far as 'losing' a discussion goes - its wise not to blow your own trumpet in those terms. By the way- i am still waiting for any credible, scientific and verifiable basis on umpire evaluation. So far, all you've presented as the criterias are opinions.

 

[Dasa]

You pander to the 'asians vs us' mentality, which is not just inaccurate but highly hypocritical given the overwhelming historical precedence in dealings with your nation. You dont realise that its your mentality (the closet white supremist) that is part of the problem here - all your debates are geared towards casting a better light to white teams and people at the expense of others, on the back of revisionist history.
Such as Ganguly vs Aussie team ( missing the point that if the system itself is flawed and biassed, quoting disciplinary record is irrelevant), to Kerry Packer vs Dalmiya, to Hair vs Pakistani team etc etc.

You know what, that argument will be dismissed by most people, but I can see all you've mentioned in some posts on here.

 

[Dick Rockett]

You know what, that argument will be dismissed by most people, but I can see all you've mentioned in some posts on here.

If it does get dismissed, it'll be due to C_C's predilection for getting wound up and writing screeds of stuff that comes across as sanctimonious, presumptuous and possibly untrue. C_C does have a lot of good ideas, but a sense of diplomacy would help.

I don't mean for this to be a beat-up on him, but I do get frustrated reading his posts and thinking there's some quality thought processes going on behind the streams of invective. When he's in a laid back mood, he can be quite funny and thoughtful, even if I usually don't agree with him.

 

[social]

No, i dont respond to everything with the race card- just when it comes to some issues pertaining to your nation, given the sad precedence.I have not commented on anything that is political or economic matter pertaining to Australia and the social issues i've addressed are common knowledge - your treatment of the aboriginals, the distinct presence of racism in your country and a totally 'white dominated' sporting scene despite significant immigration to your nation.
You respond to all this by bringing up 'caste' issues which ludicrously misses the point - the issues of your country's effects are on an international sphere- as racism and discrimination of multicultural communities are. Its not an internal matter that doesnt affect foreigners and therefore, i do have every right to comment on the well known brand of racism comming out of your country. As per my 'brand of logic', well i am an accredited registered professional in a field that requires logic and science, unlike you. So i suggest you put a lid on it.



Err no. It is a sorry indictment of your nation, given the history and precedence. You have an obligation as a citizen of your nation to not ignore or gloss over the issues which you tend to do- which is precisely the reason you are the type that is picked on and not everyone else simply coz they'r white. Despite your ramblings, the proof is in the pudding. Actions speak louder than words and so far, your actions are all in accordance with closet white-superiority perspective and i am yet to see you speak out ever against the conduct of your nation- instead you defend it both historically and currently.
You pander to the 'asians vs us' mentality, which is not just inaccurate but highly hypocritical given the overwhelming historical precedence in dealings with your nation. You dont realise that its your mentality (the closet white supremist) that is part of the problem here - all your debates are geared towards casting a better light to white teams and people at the expense of others, on the back of revisionist history.
Such as Ganguly vs Aussie team ( missing the point that if the system itself is flawed and biassed, quoting disciplinary record is irrelevant), to Kerry Packer vs Dalmiya, to Hair vs Pakistani team etc etc.
Oh and as far as 'losing' a discussion goes - its wise not to blow your own trumpet in those terms. By the way- i am still waiting for any credible, scientific and verifiable basis on umpire evaluation. So far, all you've presented as the criterias are opinions.

Both the caste system and racism are forms of discrimination.

Unfortunately, it does not suit your argument about Australia to highlight the fact that discrimination is infinitely worse on the sub-continent than it ever will be in places like Australia.

You make reference to Australia's treatment of Aborigines, but much ot it is ancient history and your comments are generally frothy sound bites that are naturally short on detail.

Your comment re race integration in sports is a classic example of how clueless you are when it comes to the reality of life in Oz and the way in u which attempt to influence debate by simply making outrageous statements with little or no evidence (I could set u the relatively simple task of backing this claim up with just one shred of evidence from anyone, anywhere on the planet but, what's the point? As usual, you wont do it but will simply go off on some well-worn tangent)

"Asian vs us mentality" - give it a rest. Your whole line of debate on virtually every subject revolves around the persecution of others and/or attempting to justify why sub-continental players shouldn't be responsible for their actions

Ganguly - it's not his fault, it's the system

Murali - it's not his fault, it was the law

The Oval - Hair's fault

Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah

As for the umpires, look it up on ICC's website - testing procedures are outlined

 

[Matteh]

You make reference to Australia's treatment of Aborigines, but much ot it is ancient history.

150 years = ancient?

 

[Matteh]

a totally 'white dominated' sporting scene despite significant immigration to your nation.

Look at the Australian football team at the WC. A large portion of them are part Croatian, then there's people like Bresciano who are part Italian. Still white guys, but if the immigrants are white then it's hard to have a massive percentage that aren't.

 

[Anil]

Both the caste system and racism are forms of discrimination.

yes

Unfortunately, it does not suit your argument about Australia to highlight the fact that discrimination is infinitely worse on the sub-continent than it ever will be in places like Australia.

both are evil, comparing two such social evils in terms of degrees is irrelevant in one sense, but your comparison "infinitely worse" is as usual utter tripe, after the european settlers almost completely wiped out that culture/enslaved the people while colonizing the place, par for the course from you of course....must be really convenient for you to be able to relegate it to "ancient history" like in your quote below, almost pre-historic, right?

You make reference to Australia's treatment of Aborigines, but much ot it is ancient history and your comments are generally frothy sound bites that are naturally short on detail.

 

[pasag]

Well this has become a farce. This thread should be closed IMO.

 

[C_C]

Both the caste system and racism are forms of discrimination.

You miss the point. The point is, the type of discrimination you got going affects everybody from every point on this planet- hence their opinions and commentary on this is far more valid - they not only understand the issues significantly better than you do in your caste example (and dont even pretend to that you do-i'll rat you out in two seconds) but it affects them directly. Which is why i think its laughable that you try to counter racism emmanating from your country from casteism. I am sorry but racism is far more enveloping and far more rigid in its structure, thus far more damaging.One can hide one's caste. One cant hide one's race.

Unfortunately, it does not suit your argument about Australia to highlight the fact that discrimination is infinitely worse on the sub-continent than it ever will be in places like Australia.

Thats what you WANT to believe. But historically AND currently, its patently untrue. Make no mistake - your nation is one of the worst in history when it comes to discrimination- subcontinent has had discrimination in its history for a long period but we've also have had universal sufferage for longer than entire europe and european daughter cultures combined. If you seek to dispute this, i'll have to educate you on subcontinental history then.

You make reference to Australia's treatment of Aborigines, but much ot it is ancient history and your comments are generally frothy sound bites that are naturally short on detail.

I realise that you live in a baby nation historically- but you guys were discriminating carte blanche againt the aboriginies even up to the 50s and 60s. Ie, around the time you were born. Hardly ancient history, even by the standards of a baby nation.

Your comment re race integration in sports is a classic example of how clueless you are when it comes to the reality of life in Oz and the way in u which attempt to influence debate by simply making outrageous statements with little or no evidence (I could set u the relatively simple task of backing this claim up with just one shred of evidence from anyone, anywhere on the planet but, what's the point? As usual, you wont do it but will simply go off on some well-worn tangent)

What evidence ? Point out how many non-white people are professionally employed in international or first class or even club cricket/aussie rules/footy etc etc. in your nation.
You may not like this, but it is a fact that out of all nations allowing permanent immigration through naturalisation process, Australian government and sporting scene is the least representational of its ethnic diversity.

"Asian vs us mentality" - give it a rest. Your whole line of debate on virtually every subject revolves around the persecution of others and/or attempting to justify why sub-continental players shouldn't be responsible for their actions

That is a deliberate lie - notice i've never supported Shoaib in his doping scandal. Everyone is responsible for their actions- unfortunately, not a concept that was enshrined by your nation or its cricketing bodies until very very recently - even if its merely at a cosmetic value today. You on the other hand, seek to justify the laughable behaviour and irrepsonsible decisions of Hair simply because he is aussie and he is white. Besides, why shouldnt my point revolve around persecution of others when discussing the closet-supremists types like you or your nation's history ? I mean - even in the last piddly few hundred years you've had Europeans showing up to Australia, over 90% of the history is based on discrimination and persecution of others on the basis of race. It is certainly applicable to your country and your 'culture'.

As for the umpires, look it up on ICC's website - testing procedures are outlined

I did. And i repeat - there is no credible, verifiable and scientific process in evaluating umpires. It is done solely on the basis of opinions and thus is irrelevant.Or atleast, its no more relevant than 'miss australia = best aussie chick around' idea.

 

[social]

yes



both are evil, comparing two such social evils in terms of degrees is irrelevant in one sense, but your comparison "infinitely worse" is as usual utter tripe, after the european settlers almost completely wiped out that culture/enslaved the people while colonizing the place, par for the course from you of course....must be really convenient for you to be able to relegate it to "ancient history" like in your quote below, almost pre-historic, right?

the incidence of discrimination on the sub-continent is far, far greater than it is in Oz

wiped out culture? enslaved? - god u guys are ignorant