• 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.

Racial Slur or Misunderstanding?

four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
Do I understand that the article is saying that a player born in one country cannot be properly committed to England? Surely that is way OTT if nothing else... no-one can seriously suggest that Strauss is not capable of being committed to English cricket just as much as any other player. Even for a player from the other end of the spectrum in terms of age of arriving here, such as Trott, the same is true.
 
fredfertang

fredfertang

Cricket Web: All-Time Legend
cpr said:
Good article Fred, and I'd be interested in seeing a bit more of the story followed up (be it from a primary or secondary source... if he trusts you to pass on his messages)


However, why has it taken 2 years for the article to be posted? Surely your not that slow a typer?
Click to expand...
I delayed it as part of a cunning campaign to raise my profile immediately prior to the Battle of the Members tbh

Now some might argue that as an Englishman, and with CW's origins being in the land of sheep and kiwis, that I'm not really committed to that cause

.......... but such an argument would be flawed or, put more succinctly, bollocks
 
Furball

Furball

Evil Scotsman
zaremba said:
I haven't abused you. The article you wrote is unworthy of serious debate. It is drivel, pure and simple. If anyone's in doubt about that, they should read the original article and make their own minds up.



Sounds a terrific idea. But sadly I am fresh out of green ink.
Click to expand...
You're not a cricket writer, so keep your opinions to yourself :p
 
silentstriker

silentstriker

The Wheel is Forever
Read the article. Ahem.

To start off:

1. Can you give an example of a white player not picked in WI despite being good enough?
2. Untouchables not playing for India has very little with not being selected despite having the talents, and everything to do with the fact that their socioeconomic situations don't allow them to play cricket anywhere they'd be noticed in the first place.
3. It was the official policy in SA - surely that's a "practical and reasonable" difference that you ask for.
4. I really fail to grasp a larger point - are you saying people won't do as well at the Test level because they don't quite think of themselves as being the same nationality (a point i disagree with but let's assume that's true) - doesn't that fly in the face of all the other sports which aren't based on nationality but people try their best and give it their all in hopes of playing at the highest level, making the money, etc? Meaning, would Nasser Hussain have tried harder if he had played for India? I can't really see that.
 
Last edited:
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
wpdavid said:
Sigh - Is it in the blood? posted (again) at Mr Beck's request - uk.sport.cricket | Google Groups
Click to expand...
I think time has shown what rubbish most of the arguments have been. I mean, to exemplify the argument with the fact that Nasser Hussain considers himself Indian... did that mean he was a less committed and passionate Enland player? You'd have to say no, because Nasser was one of the most committed and passionate England players ever.

Basically, sometimes England are ****, sometimes we're great, sometimes somewhere in between. At all of those times we've had players who have not been, in the authors term, 'unequivocally English'. It's completely unrelated.
 
R

RH156

Cricket Spectator
zaremba said:
I haven't abused you. The article you wrote is unworthy of serious debate. It is drivel, pure and simple. If anyone's in doubt about that, they should read the original article and make their own minds up.

Still unable to distinguish between abuse and argument I see.....
Click to expand...
 
BoyBrumby

BoyBrumby

Englishman
four_or_six said:
I think time has shown what rubbish most of the arguments have been. I mean, to exemplify the argument with the fact that Nasser Hussain considers himself Indian... did that mean he was a less committed and passionate Enland player? You'd have to say no, because Nasser was one of the most committed and passionate England players ever.

Basically, sometimes England are ****, sometimes we're great, sometimes somewhere in between. At all of those times we've had players who have not been, in the authors term, 'unequivocally English'. It's completely unrelated.
Click to expand...
He doesn't:

"I have always considered myself to be 100 per cent English. Everything I do, everything I am, my accent, my upbringing, is totally English. I love the country and have always considered it home. But I've always been proud of my Indian roots."
 
chasingthedon

chasingthedon

International Regular
The 1995 article did not include a single shred of evidence that those who are not "unequivocally English" did not give as much effort as those who are.

Also, the 1991 article, claiming that the then parlous state of English Test cricket could be blamed on the inclusion in the Test team of those of Asian, West Indian and South African descent and the set-up of the first-class game as regards overseas cricketers surely has been proved to be without merit in the intervening years with England's ascent to number one-ranked Test nation? Engand performed poorly in 1991 simply because they were inferior to the opposition, no more, no less.
 
zaremba

zaremba

Cricketer Of The Year
RH156 said:
Still unable to distinguish between abuse and argument I see.....
Click to expand...
I have a working knowledge of the distinction thanks.

I have not abused you. For all I know you're a smashing chap. I have described your article as drivel; and drivel is precisely what it is. That is not abuse of you, it is an appraisal of the merit of what you were (quite astonishingly) given a platform to broadcast to a wide audience.

Beyond that broad observation, and my encouragement to other members of the forum to read your article and form their own opinions about it, I am not going to engage with you about the article or your views in any detail, because experience shows that once that kind of debate starts, it is unlikely to end; and if it does end, it does not end well.
 
four_or_six

four_or_six

Cricketer Of The Year
BoyBrumby said:
He doesn't:

"I have always considered myself to be 100 per cent English. Everything I do, everything I am, my accent, my upbringing, is totally English. I love the country and have always considered it home. But I've always been proud of my Indian roots."
Click to expand...
Thanks, must have been a misquote in the other article. Not that it really matters anyway.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top