***Official*** England in Pakistan

[ClownSymonds]

Not really considering he cheated. Also can a part of the penalty/ban fall on Inzamam as he was the captain?

I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished. I just don't think he should get banned. Especially not since he's the most exciting player in world cricket besides Clown.

 

[Beleg]

An 'honest mistake' is a violation. When a law is broken, a violation occurs, no matter the intention of the law-breaker. Intention only comes into play when deciding the penalty for law-breaking.

And, err, who is saying there is anything sinister going on?

 

[luckyeddie]

Have you ever taken part in a discussion without retorting to pitiful namecalling?

Eh?

I now realise that attempting to discuss anything with you now is a violation.

 

[Beleg]

Regarding Afridi, I totally agree with what SJS said.

 

[luckyeddie]

An 'honest mistake' is a violation. When a law is broken, a violation occurs, no matter the intention of the law-breaker. Intention only comes into play when deciding the penalty for law-breaking.

And, err, who is saying there is anything sinister going on?

There are two definitions of violation - one interpretation is that it is a minor transgression (this is an Americanism where they consider a violation to be less than a foul) and the other is where the transgression is far, far worse.

You chose the mild, American interpretation, everyone else chose the proper, English one (because we all know that Americans cannot speak English anyway - and that's a joke before you accuse me of racism as well as calling you names).

 

[supereddi08]

An 'honest mistake' is a violation. When a law is broken, a violation occurs, no matter the intention of the law-breaker. Intention only comes into play when deciding the penalty for law-breaking.

And, err, who is saying there is anything sinister going on?

Review the umpire's performance and if he has made a massive howler then he should spend a couple of weeks back in domestic cricket or something similar.

I'm saying what afridi did is sinister because it was a deliberate attempt to affect the playing surface. Umpire = wrong, afridi = insane

 

[Beleg]

I now realise that attempting to discuss anything with you now is a violation.

Calling someone melodramatic = obviously a harmless little quip, isn't it (just like the quoted one)

Obviously, if you want to continue/end discussion it's your prerogative, I'll just note that you still haven't responded to the actual question/issue at hand, merely focused on peripheral one-liners.

 

[nick-o]

Not really considering he cheated. Also can a part of the penalty/ban fall on Inzamam as he was the captain?

While we're at it -- let's ban Vaughno as well as he was captain and Bellow cheated.

So by my tally we've now banned four players and three umpires -- not a bad day's effort. By the end of the fifth day we'll probably be playing five-a-side, with the exploding drinks trolleys as umpires.

 

[Pratters]

I'm not saying he shouldn't be punished. I just don't think he should get banned. Especially not since he's the most exciting player in world cricket besides Clown.

Okay you are just being funny or silly here suggesting Afridi should not be banned because he is exciting.

I think a ban is needed because fines really dont hurt as much and does not get the message across as much. Players get fined for excessive appealing and the like. But the extra appealing still continues.

If a ban is not implemented it will set a bad precedence. Hampering the pitch or trying to hamper the pitch is a very serious issue and it should be handled in that light.

 

[Scaly piscine]

Well the Shoaib pitch roughing incident has reminded me to rank Pakistan as most hated team. I thought they'd evolved from picking at the ball as they did 5-10 years ago, but obviously nothing has changed. The PCB can still limit a lot of the damage if they ban Afridi for a long time, but as far as I'm concerned this Test series should be abandoned, 2 chuckers in the first Test and now this.

 

[supereddi08]

As an aside do you think the players were nervous when they had that drinks break after the explosion. I mean someone was driving a potential pepsi can bomb straight at them... now that would've made a mark on the wicket...

 

[Beleg]

supereddi08:

A couple of things.

1. I thought we were discussing Inzamam's incident. What has Afridi got to do with it? (but if you really want to get my opinion on it; he should be banned)

2. The comment you initially quoted was only half-serious. I am not really advocating that Hair should be banned. But I do think that this sort of lapse doesn't bode well for the general image of umpiring and some sort of a reprimand ought to be issued. (your suggestion is pretty good, IMO)

 

[Pratters]

While we're at it -- let's ban Vaughno as well as he was captain and Bellow cheated.

If it was an individual thing of Afridi then you have to take action against Afridi. If it was done because of the wise advice of the captain, Inzamam is as much at fault. I doubt Afridi would have done it on his own without the knowledge of Inzy. But there is very little chance of proving this as we cannot know what is in their minds.

 

[supereddi08]

supereddi08:

A couple of things.

1. I thought we were discussing Inzamam's incident. What has Afridi got to do with it? (but if you really want to get my opinion on it; he should be banned)

2. The comment you initially quoted was only half-serious. I am not really advocating that Hair should be banned. But I do think that this sort of lapse doesn't bode well for the general image of umpiring and some sort of a reprimand ought to be issued. (your suggestion is pretty good, IMO)

Okay, my mistake on number 1, I misread and thought you were trying to argue if Afridi gets banned then so should Hair. Look, if a mistake has been made then something should be put to the umpires to explain themselves, if they were just ignorant of the rule then that's a poor excuse because it's basically their job to know all the rules and apply them. Pretty weird situation though... I certainly wouldn't have known it was outside the rules unless someone informed me.

 

[Dasa]

Symonds was brought back on in the ODI series when Australia toured SL back in 2004. I remember him chopping a ball on his pads, the umpire gave it out and then realised how stupid a mistake he made. He asked Jayasuriya (or whomever was captain, I think it was him) if Symonds could come back and he did. SL won anyway.

They could have done that this time couldn't they?

They would have to realise their mistake before the next batsman began his innings I think - that was what happened in the Symonds incident anyway.

edit: From the Laws of Cricket:
Law 27
9. Umpire's decision
An umpire may alter his decision provided that such alteration is made promptly. This apart, an umpire's decision, once made, is final.

 

[supereddi08]

Hair did talk to inzy not afridi after the incident so maybe he believes the captain is responsible for his players actions as much as the player is...

 

[ClownSymonds]

Well the Shoaib pitch roughing incident has reminded me to rank Pakistan as most hated team. I thought they'd evolved from picking at the ball as they did 5-10 years ago, but obviously nothing has changed. The PCB can still limit a lot of the damage if they ban Afridi for a long time, but as far as I'm concerned this Test series should be abandoned, 2 chuckers in the first Test and now this.

You're being ridiculous. The chuckers had just been cleared, and the Afridi incident is all but cancelled out by the Bell one. Pakistan still have a long way to go before they take England's title of most hated team.

 

[supereddi08]

You're being ridiculous. The chuckers had just been cleared, and the Afridi incident is all but cancelled out by the Bell one. Pakistan still have a long way to go before they take England's title of most hated team.

And england are hated because they won the ashes huh?

 

[luckyeddie]

Calling someone melodramatic = obviously a harmless little quip, isn't it (just like the quoted one)

Obviously, if you want to continue/end discussion it's your prerogative, I'll just note that you still haven't responded to the actual question/issue at hand, merely focused on peripheral one-liners.

I agreed that Inzamam was hard done to, yet you called for umpire Hair to be banned. Now if that isn't a hysterical, melodramatic reaction, I don't know what is.

Is there any point in attempting to discuss anything at all with you? Without wishing to further inflame your already raw nerves, what point is it that I haven't addressed?

 

[Scaly piscine]

You're being ridiculous. The chuckers had just been cleared, and the Afridi incident is all but cancelled out by the Bell one. Pakistan still have a long way to go before they take England's title of most hated team.

Where have the chuckers been cleared? And no blatant, deliberate and pre-meditated cheating is not cancelled out by claiming a catch that is inconclusive on the replays.