I didn't say that the crowd did anything in regards to Warne. No, he didn't get as much guff from he crowds.
You asked when Warne had been called a cheat. I pointed out examples.
No, Murali doesn't have to deal with taunts as anyone else does. Getting upset at the crowds may not necessarily be the WRONG way to handle it, but I wouldn't think it would be the healthiest or most productive. His call, though- not mine.
If that is your opinion, I agree with that. I told as much in one of my earlier posts. And about the way I sounded disparaging in my post about Warne, it was only because sideshowtim has often made a number of posts in the same manner about Murali. You thought it fit to have a go at me because I sounded disparaging in my posts, but I was doing exactly the same thing because I know that sideshowtim has made a number of such posts on this issue and honestly, I just got tired of it. Just because the man reacts to some insults thrown at him doesn't mean he is acting TOO PRECIOUS, for God's sakes....
Sigh. Now, from my last post, did you REALLY think I would respond well to this type of nonsense? "The very damn right of his to be a cricket player". So emotive. So heart-tingling. Such ridiculous, pointless hyperbole.
Jeering "no-ball" is not some heinous, inappropriate insult. If such a taunt really affects Murali as much as it does you, then he needs to get some perspective. As I said earlier, no one is universally loved, no matter what your achievements. When you are in the public eye, you are even more susceptible to varying opinions.
Deal with it.
Call me crazy, but I would think that someone who has made his living performing in front of thousands of people for a decade would have some handle on how to deal with a noisy crowd. Or should cricket be like tennis, where the crowd is expected to remain silent during play?
Of course it is emotive. There are still a NUMBER of people in Australia and in other cricket playing nations who believe that he is still bowling illegally. We have such people here even in these forums. And I think quite a majority of the guys who shout out these stuff must believe the same. So there you go, questioning his "right to be a cricket player", because if he is not allowed to bowl, how is he going to earn his place? AS a batsman?
I'll say this again- the crowd has BOUGHT the right to react to the performers on the field. The performers SOLD that right to them.
And I will say this again... The rules have said that he is legal and yet to keep calling him a cheat is not "reacting" to performances on the field.... It is a little more than that. I will bet my bottom dollar that these idiots will yell out no ball even if he is bowling with 0 degree flex and it was proved scientifically. These guys come in with an agenda to rile Murali and call him whatever they feel like calling. If you are going to allow such guys into cricket, as I said, it won't be long before it all degenerates to hooliganism and stuff. There is a reason why certain guys get banned from CW and why they regard the "forum atmosphere" as a main thing here. The same goes for cricket and the "cricket atmosphere"...
Sure, Tendulkar gets it bad. Not quite as bad as Warne has, but he's up there. Fair point.
How is it not quite as bad? The only reason Sachin doesn't get personal abuse is because he is a very clean guy in his personal life and his personal life has largely remained incident-free compared to Warne.
I "adore" Warne no more and no less than I "adore" Murali. I am fascinated by what they do on the field, just as I was by Ambrose, and Lillee, and Richards, and Bishop, and Botham, and Gower, and a few dozen more I could name. I "adore" them in as much as they entertain the cricket-lover in me.
I certainly have no emotional attachment to them, nor do I take any offence to anyone else's opinions of them. Trust me, you can insult Warne as much as you want, and you won't get the slightest rise out of me.
I "went after you" because you were saying some pretty dopey things- not because of any misguided hero-worship.
I replied to sideshowtim for the exact same reasons... And yet you said that I am emotionally attached to Murali. I am emotionally attached not to Murali, but to this issue, because I am tired to seeing him get so much stick here in this forum inspite of having done little wrong to deserve it..... And FYI, I adore Warne much more than Murali. Warney is the one I have spoken to and Warney is the one who is more fun to interact with, purely from a spectator's point of view.
To answer your questions in order: Don't remember, yes, yes, yes, and I knew you'd have doubts. I even said so in my first post- pretty psychic of me, eh?
I couldn't care less what happens in Chennai. If they do actually stop taunts, then they are being silly.
Why do you think it is silly? And how many times has there been any crowd trouble in chennai? Why is it rated as one of the best grounds, audience-wise, in the world by almost all players who have played there? If you think there is correlation of it all to the excellent spectator policing that is done there, then you are being silly.
And since when is spectator policing a bad thing? It shouldn't go overboard, just like everything else in life, but surely there is a need for that? And for the last time, when you call a guy a CHUCKER and a CHEAT, it goes beyond an insult on the person's cricketing abilities, which is the maximum that can be tolerated at a cricket ground, IMO.
As for the rest, eh- I've said my piece. All the wailing and gnashing of teeth doesn't change the fact that the no-ball chant is far from being a grievous insult. They attack his race, then boot the idiots and hang 'em by the goolies. They attack an aspect of his performance, then they are well within bounds.
It is not an aspect of his performance.... It is not like he has a problem overstepping and hence every ball of his is called a NO BALL by the crowd. They are branding him a cheat and that is why it is a problem for him and for most people who know he isn't. They are not well within bounds here because it is NOT an aspect of his performance. It is questioning the integrity of the person and accusing him of transgressing laws.....
I was "distraught"? Either I am nowhere near as good at conveying tone as I thought I was, or you are projecting your own emotional investment onto me. As a writer, I would hope like hell it is the latter, or I need to find a new ambition...
(Just in case- I am a LONG way from distraught. Not even slightly annoyed.)
If he takes exception to a few foreign supporters' negative opinion of his achievements (despite the fact that the vast majority of fans around the would admire his deeds), then I would suggest that he has a slight problem processing negative feedback. I'm no Freud, but I think my conclusion is within the bounds of possibility.
And a professional sportsman wanting people to "leave them alone" while they play needs a reality check. There is an argument for the notion that their private lives are their own, but what they do on the field is fair game for comment. This case is no exception.
yeah, the way you jumped on my post made me think that you were just so angry that I had taken digs at Warney. If you weren't, then no problems.
Now you are saying that it is only a "few" people... From what I see on the telly, it seems to be more than just a "few", but since you live there I am gonna accept your opinion, assuming that you have been to most matches involving Murali. But if it is only a minority, what is the loss for CA if they boot them out? Surely, with the improvement of the atmosphere in the stadium, the cricketers will definitely play better cricket and even if they don't, surely the game can be enjoyed better without such annoying idiots around? And of course, by "leaving them alone", I mean NOT accusing them of cheating and playing outside the rules when they actually aren't.... I have said this before, there is a diff. between taunting Murali over his poor record in Oz and tauting Murali about his action.... Just because people have the right to comment doesn't mean they go about calling him a "cheat" everytime he bowls even though it has been proven that he is only as much of a cheat as every other bowler in the game.........
Nope- not from the VAST majority. People were interacting in a new way, and were having some fun. Maybe a very few were malicious, but no more. Jumping in on a joke and taking the piss is the Australian way. Just a cultural difference, I suppose.
And may I be the first to congratulate Dasa and Jason on the esteem to which they are apparently held. I'm not sure why it is relevant, but there ya go.
It is relevant because I am basing my opinion on what they said, as I haven't had the chance to go down to Australia and watch cricket there when they were playing Sri Lanka. These men live there and are active cricket followers who go to the games there and they have mentioned that the whole "No Ball" chants when Murali is bowling is a lot more than just "having some fun".
I am open to any suggestions. At the moment, I get up at about 10pm, play a round of golf, clean the house, play some poker and indulge in a bad habit or two. The joys of a well-paid wife and some good investments.
If your suggestions involve me expending any more energy than my current lot, I think I'll pass, thanks all the same.
And let me be the first to congratulate on the joys of your life, even though I am not sure how it is relevant here...
Heh. Just so you all know, this was the EXACT reason I chose this thread to respond to. I can sniff out a hypocrite at twenty paces.
EVERY disparaging comment I made to you was a DIRECT response to a disparaging comment YOU made to someone else. EVERY SINGLE ONE.
You called someone stupid, I called you stupid. You told someone they were ridiculous, I told you that YOU were ridiculous. I dressed it up, added some humour and threw it back to you- and now you whine like you are trying to take the high road. Stones, house, throw- you put it together.
Just so you know, from the few dozen posts I have made here, I am quite sure that anyone can see that I am capable of debating points in a straight manner just as well as I can use levity and wit. I can also be a hell of a lot more insulting, by-the-by, but I play by the rules that are set.
I am not sure why I needed a big character description of you from yourself there... If you are all that, congratulations and welcome to active CW... Hope we can have some entertaining and hopefully mutually agreeable discussions in the future...
First of all, it might have been worth your while to find out who I was responding to and what sort of posts he has made. Just like you thought it was worth it to reply with disparaging remarks at me when I made them at someone else, I was doing the same.
And I don't know about why I would sound like "whining" there..... Also, when did I call someone "stupid"? Calling some argument as "stupid" is the same as calling someone "stupid"??? Same with the word "ridiculous"... I don't stoop down to personal insults as much as I can, and you can check out my whole posting history for that. There have been times when I have gone over the line and I have apologized, but your example of houses, stones, and throw doesn't exactly fit here in this situation. You can see that all along I was arguing the point than the poster, except when I am responding to sideshowtim and that is because I have seen him post such stuff for a while now and he was acting as though it was a crime for Murali to react the way he did. Perhaps it might have been better for me not to have bothered to reply, but some posts get on some people's nerves here (Eg, Sanz and Richard) and it is just the same with me. You talked about not insulting personally and then you go and say I was "whining"... Again, I can so easily say stuff about you but I won't because I still think you are good poster and I do think we can get over this bad start and enter into more friendly discussions on cricket....
It doesn't matter how many times you say the same thing, "no ball" isn't crossing the line. It is not on the par of being unlawful- it isn't even to the point of being anti-social.
Didn't Inzy whack him for calling him a "potato"? That's worse than being smacked with a bat? Really?
I read in the reports that it was worse than that and anyways, I think actually what happened was that Inzy misunderstood a certain word which is just satirical to another word which is very insulting and obviously the words sounded similar and he just went off. What I am trying to say through that example is that, if you sense that someone is purposefully riling some player on some issues important to him, get that guy evicted. It is obvious that he doesn't care or appreciate the cricket or the cricketers, so what is the need to have him there?
And yes, calling "no-ball" means he is doing something unlawful in cricket, which he is not and which in essense means he is a cheat and if he takes it personally, what is wrong in that? Maybe to some people the implication of being a cheat doesn't mean much, but to a lot of others, it does and that is why I believe the line has to be drawn and if it is done, this would be on the other side. He has basically proven himself through so many tests and so many filmings that he is clean and he is not breaking any laws while bowling and yet he is called all this. Everyone has a tolerance limit and this is not an issue reg. his cricketing abilities alone, his whole character and the legality of all his achievements is being painted in a poor light and after 10 years, a man is bound to react to such things. And it is not OK, no matter how much you think it is OK, to question a guy's achievements after he has gone through so much and actually to make fun of it when he is seriously trying to play his best for his country....
First and foremost- I don't rant. I also didn't put any words into your mouth- I DIRECTLY quoted you. I'm not rehashing the same stuff again. Others can read what I wrote and see if it matches up with what you said.
yes, they can and I just quoted both posts in my previous post.
And for the umpteenth time- racial stuff is way over the line, and is rightly punished. No one should have to deal with that. No need to build strawmen.
"No ball" is not racial, nor does any connotation you can draw from it even approach the magnitude of racism, no matter how many times you get indignant about the taunt. It just isn't close, and isn't beyond the line.
You can think they are ignorant, but to suggest that they should be censured for it s pretty dopey.
"No ball" isn't but as has been pointed out in this thread previously, it is often spiced up with some more racist stuff. But leaving that aside, even the "no ball" calls are not beyond the line.... The line is something, if it is ever drawn, that should only encompass the barest minimum insults that can be tolerable by all teams around the world, taking the various cultures into account and as I said, questioning the legality (cricketing wise) of a player's achievements and yelling out "cheat" when he is playing are not on, esp. since the guy has proven that he is not all that he is being accused.... For you, maybe, the taunt isn't beyond the line, but for some cricketers, it is and for some reason, I think their opinion counts for more in this issue than yours, since they are the ones who will actually have to face it......
Then those boards are wrong.
ZING!!! You really got me...
I have no reason to think you are lying, so I'll defer to you on that. They are still extraordinarily silly to do so.
Nope, those boards are right. To question a guy's cricketing skills is one thing, but to imply that the guy is a cheater isn't... And no, Chennai admin guys are not silly. The vast majority (easily 95%) of the folks who turn up there want to watch good cricket and they don't give a damn if some of the idiots who try to create trouble by sprouting out insults at other players, esp. when it goes beyond their cricketing skills and performances.... Therefore, the admins are very strict and they just throw out guys who are detrimental to the atmosphere of the stadium and the ground in general.
Here is an example... During the India-Australia test in 2004, Australia were bowled out in the first day itself and they came out to field. Langer was standing near our stand and we (me and my cousin) yelled out that he will score a duck in the second dig. While the way he handled it was a lesson to all cricketers, that is not my point here. My point is that is a straight sledge on his cricket... We are not implying that he is a cheat and we are most certainly not dragging his personal life into this ( unlike what happens with Murali, Warne and that one time with Gilchrist)... And the crowd policing guys didn't mind. It all added to the fun, esp. since Langer was such a good sport about it and kept telling us ( in a jovial way, of course) that he will score a double ton in the second innings and that we were always wrong. That is the sort of banter and good fun that one looks for in cricket... Not the sort that happens with Murali because it is obvious it is more than just abt his cricket there and it affects him....
