So is India safe to tour or is it just a media beat-up?

[honestbharani]

The players who have been mentioned are Hayden, Gilchrist, and Warne, all have retired, why does that matter?

coz they are also part of Australia and are playing the IPL?

 

[Streetwise]

coz they are also part of Australia and are playing the IPL?

But what are they doing with the Australian team, they dont play for us and belong to Indian teams, they can go and play in India even if CA dont want them to. They are Indian domestic players and nothing to do with Australian cricket.

Sounds like they are there just to stir up crap with the Australian team.

 

[Sanz]

The players who have been mentioned are Hayden, Gilchrist, and Warne, all have retired, why does that matter?

I do not understand the question. FICA supposedly represents both past and present players and that is probably why they are there.

 

[Sanz]

But what are they doing with the Australian team, they dont play for us and belong to Indian teams, they can go and play in India even if CA dont want them to. They are Indian domestic players and nothing to do with Australian cricket.

Sounds like they are there just to stir up crap with the Australian team.

 

[jeevan]

I disagree with the above. Player Associations are no way connected with the IPL and hence I believe it is not in their jurisdiction to even talk to Modi & Co on this. But the individual players have every right to speak on this to their individual teams. That is a very legitimate thing and I don't think IPL will compromise a bit on security issue. The dialogue here involves and should involve the player (or an agent approved by IPL to talk on his behalf) , the team, and the IPL board and absolutely noone else.

Coming up with constructive solutions does not really require jurisdiction.

There clearly is a problem with terrorists targeting IPL. We can quibble all day long about who should by doing what, but in the end this problem has to be solved or at least reduced in probability.

 

[Bracken]

Cicket: Oz IPL stars hit back at Ponting over security concerns | CRICKET News

"Ponting is reported to want all 25 players to adopt a united front, and pull out of the tournament because of security concerns."


Still have doubt why Poor innocent Ponting is singled out here ? Any idea what is his interest here when he is not even going to play ?

Okey dokey. So you're holding up an unsourced, uncredited news report that makes a vague reference to "reports" as proof positive that he is trying to "sabotage" (your words) the IPL. Awesome.

I single out Ponting because the Aussie media reported a clash between Ponting and Gilly/Hayden/Warne. If Ponting didn't do anything why would aussie media report that story.

The Australian media report that you linked read as follows:

The Australian understands there is a split among the freelance former Test cricketers who want to attend and Cricket Australia-contracted players who want everybody to work as one on the issue.

It is understood the past players, including Shane Warne, Matthew Hayden and Adam Gilchrist clashed with Australia's captain Ricky Ponting during the meeting.​

The story doesn't claim that Ponting is alone in his view within the ACA, the story doesn't claim that Ponting, all butthurt over being dropped, is trying to "force" all of the players to boycott, and it doesn't claim that the ACA is trying to convince players not to participate in the tournament. Of course, you've somehow managed to draw all of these conclusions, and claim them to be fact.

More to the point, this is the ONLY original journalism that I've been able to find on the story. Every other report refers to this story, either explicitly or by allusion.

That report goes on to quote the ACA chief, Paul Marsh, saying that, "...that's the way we've operated in the past...". Since the ACA's inception, the group has sought to bargain, negotiate and consult as a single, collective voice.

This is why the fact that the dissenting players are retired is relevant, and why I mentioned it. The retired players mentioned- particularly Warne, who was one of the strongest driving forces behind the formation of the ACA and the development of the ACA's methodologies and tactics- all were vocally supportive of the idea of a single representative voice, and spent years profiting from it. Whilst they have every right to reassess whether or not collective bargaining is still in their best interests, it is insane (and completely unreasonable) to condemn Ponting for maintaining support for the same methods that Warne, Gilchrist and the like spent years profiting from.

And when you boil it down, this is the only thing that Ponting is (as yet) reported to have done. The guy has spent his career giving people reason to call him a disagreeable prick, and I have no doubt that before his time is done he'll give us a few more.

Instead of inventing them out of nothing, how about we wait for him to do so?

Ofcourse he has the right to express his opinion and if his opinion is unjust and unfair to some, others have the right to react to that as well. It is funny that you are being a champion for Ponting's right at the same time not willing to give the same right to Modi (by branding him as a politician) who is obviously reacting to the reports in the Aussie media.

Yeah, you're really grasping at straws here. You're trying to equate me showing admiration for Modi's political ability with my supposed desire to disclaim Modi's right to express an opinion.

For the life of me, I can't work out if this is a language barrier thing, if you're being deliberately obtuse just to score some imaginary internet-argument points, or if it's just '****oo's Nest level insanity.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's a comprehension issue, so I'll reiterate. I've heard of Modi's deftness in navigating the political waters (both within India and in the international cricket community), but I've never seen his operate in real time.

In the space of a few tweets, he completely reframed the issue, from a defensive one ("the uncaring corporation refusing to countenance the security concerns of the poor players") to an offensive one (where his organisation is being victimised and torpedoed by a vengeful, spiteful, unlikeable player, embarrassed and angry over being told that his services are no longer required). There are very, very few people who have the knowledge and the ability to pull that off with anything less than a huge publicity campaign. Modi accomplished it in a few sentences.

It is not inaccurate to call Modi a great politician. That's a compliment, not an insult.

As for you not being a fanboy? Well...

So why should the 100s of members, vast majority of whom have nothing to do with IPL, decide the fate of few IPL contracted players ?

Are you under the impression that if you keep saying this, it'll magically become true?

Once again: The only person that decides any individual player's fate is that player himself. The ACA has NEVER claimed any power to compel a dissenting member to abide by the wishes of the majority.

 

[silentstriker]

One thing I find hilarious is that apparently some guy wants to hire a bodybuard. I don't think the type of threat we're talking about really means that a bodyguard would help in any way....

 

[jeevan]

One thing I find hilarious is that apparently some guy wants to hire a bodybuard. I don't think the type of threat we're talking about really means that a bodyguard would help in any way....

Yeah, and that's where I think players (& franchises, and IPL) pooling resources will come in handy. Either each city and/or each team needs a large squad incl dogs & equipment.

 

[Sanz]

One thing I find hilarious is that apparently some guy wants to hire a bodybuard. I don't think the type of threat we're talking about really means that a bodyguard would help in any way....

 

[Matt79]

Might have helped the Sri Lankan team if they had guys who were willing to stand there and shoot back rather than run for the hills....

 

[silentstriker]

Yes, that makes a lot of sense. Hire a bodyguard who will fire with a handguns against entrenched machine gun fire from the position you're at. That's definitely not going to bring a ****-storm down on your head. If my bodyguard did that, I'd fire his ass on the spot.

Why do you think so many police died compared to players? Hint: regardless of your plans, you tend to point your guns at the guys trying to hit you with bullets.....

 

[Streetwise]

Okey dokey. So you're holding up an unsourced, uncredited news report that makes a vague reference to "reports" as proof positive that he is trying to "sabotage" (your words) the IPL. Awesome.



The Australian media report that you linked read as follows:

The Australian understands there is a split among the freelance former Test cricketers who want to attend and Cricket Australia-contracted players who want everybody to work as one on the issue.

It is understood the past players, including Shane Warne, Matthew Hayden and Adam Gilchrist clashed with Australia's captain Ricky Ponting during the meeting.​

The story doesn't claim that Ponting is alone in his view within the ACA, the story doesn't claim that Ponting, all butthurt over being dropped, is trying to "force" all of the players to boycott, and it doesn't claim that the ACA is trying to convince players not to participate in the tournament. Of course, you've somehow managed to draw all of these conclusions, and claim them to be fact.

More to the point, this is the ONLY original journalism that I've been able to find on the story. Every other report refers to this story, either explicitly or by allusion.

That report goes on to quote the ACA chief, Paul Marsh, saying that, "...that's the way we've operated in the past...". Since the ACA's inception, the group has sought to bargain, negotiate and consult as a single, collective voice.

This is why the fact that the dissenting players are retired is relevant, and why I mentioned it. The retired players mentioned- particularly Warne, who was one of the strongest driving forces behind the formation of the ACA and the development of the ACA's methodologies and tactics- all were vocally supportive of the idea of a single representative voice, and spent years profiting from it. Whilst they have every right to reassess whether or not collective bargaining is still in their best interests, it is insane (and completely unreasonable) to condemn Ponting for maintaining support for the same methods that Warne, Gilchrist and the like spent years profiting from.

And when you boil it down, this is the only thing that Ponting is (as yet) reported to have done. The guy has spent his career giving people reason to call him a disagreeable prick, and I have no doubt that before his time is done he'll give us a few more.

Instead of inventing them out of nothing, how about we wait for him to do so?



Yeah, you're really grasping at straws here. You're trying to equate me showing admiration for Modi's political ability with my supposed desire to disclaim Modi's right to express an opinion.

For the life of me, I can't work out if this is a language barrier thing, if you're being deliberately obtuse just to score some imaginary internet-argument points, or if it's just '****oo's Nest level insanity.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it's a comprehension issue, so I'll reiterate. I've heard of Modi's deftness in navigating the political waters (both within India and in the international cricket community), but I've never seen his operate in real time.

In the space of a few tweets, he completely reframed the issue, from a defensive one ("the uncaring corporation refusing to countenance the security concerns of the poor players") to an offensive one (where his organisation is being victimised and torpedoed by a vengeful, spiteful, unlikeable player, embarrassed and angry over being told that his services are no longer required). There are very, very few people who have the knowledge and the ability to pull that off with anything less than a huge publicity campaign. Modi accomplished it in a few sentences.

It is not inaccurate to call Modi a great politician. That's a compliment, not an insult.

As for you not being a fanboy? Well...



Are you under the impression that if you keep saying this, it'll magically become true?

Once again: The only person that decides any individual player's fate is that player himself. The ACA has NEVER claimed any power to compel a dissenting member to abide by the wishes of the majority.

Funny thing is Warne came out immediately and squashed this rumour saying he did not have words with Ponting and they are great mates but I suppose this fact will be forever missed in the scramble to nail Ponting to the cross.

 

[jeevan]

Isn't there a simple explanation for at least part of Ponting's motivations - namely that he is concerned personally for some of the guys and definitely worried about disruption to his team should something actually happen.

As long as he is not abusing his authority as a captain by threatening selectorial consequences etc, I do not see what wrong he has done.

 

[silentstriker]

IPL terror fears ease after talks | Stuff.co.nz

Apparently, the experts are saying the threat from the group is not credible.

 

[Sir Alex]

IPL terror fears ease after talks | Stuff.co.nz

Apparently, the experts are saying the threat from the group is not credible.

Modi 1 Player Associations 0

 

[silentstriker]

That's a mischaracterization. Obviously players wanted to go, that's how they get paid. They'd be as happy as anyone if the security threat turns out to be not a big deal.

It would be a win for the player's unions if they could decide as a unit whether to go or not. It was never about not wanting to go, it was about making a decision as one body.

 

[Sir Alex]

That's a mischaracterization. Obviously players wanted to go, that's how they get paid. They'd be as happy as anyone if the security threat turns out to be not a big deal.

It would be a win for the player's unions if they could decide as a unit whether to go or not. It was never about not wanting to go, it was about making a decision as one body.

It was more about an attempt to have a say in IPL's functioning frankly. As I said before they had no business or jurisdiction in asking Modi to "share" security preparations with them.

 

[silentstriker]

What? Why not? They are going to another country FFS, why wouldn't they want to know about security preparations?

 

[Sir Alex]

What? Why not? They are going to another country FFS, why wouldn't they want to know about security preparations?

Only a select bunch of players are going to that country. The IPL has contracted with the players and not the Player associations. If players have issues with security they should personally get in touch with the IPL through their franchises. The Player Associations have no right to directly approach Modi and "demand" (yes, the tone was exactly that) specifics of security. It is like the a local trade union in Botswana approaching Bill Gates and demanding him to disclose the security planning for the entire Microsoft campus because 3-4 Botswana guys happen to work there.

 

[Streetwise]

It was more about an attempt to have a say in IPL's functioning frankly. As I said before they had no business or jurisdiction in asking Modi to "share" security preparations with them.

I think the last players to just blindly trust security preparations were Sri Lankans touring Pakistan. I just cant imagine why players would want to even know what security preparations were in place and if they are sufficient for for the concerns raised in a independent security assesment.