swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Kolkata Knight Riders chief executive Joy Bhattacharya defended Ganguly's actions, saying they were well within the laws of the game. "He just appealed to the umpire to check if the catch (by Smith) was clean. We feel he was perfectly within his rights, if he had any doubt in his mind. And if the umpire on the field had turned around and said it was clean, that would have been the end of the story Umm Mr. Bhattacharya, sorry to say but the square leg umpire, Rudi, despite suffering from occasional blindness (and gave Watson wrongly out today) said that it was a clean catch, but Ganguly went crying to the desi umpire to have it reviewed by the third umpire Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DomainK Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I think Warne is right and Ganguly is wrong on this occasion. The umpire makes a decision- follow it and don't argue. You are the captain, so set the right examples. Also these delaying techniques of Ganguly are so cheap and annoying. I hope he is punished hard enough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rohan495 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 ganguly is becoming a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Umm Mr. Bhattacharya' date=' sorry to say but the square leg umpire, Rudi, despite suffering from occasional blindness (and gave Watson wrongly out today) said that it was a clean catch, but Ganguly went crying to the desi umpire to have it reviewed by the third umpire[/quote'] The video coverage http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/64379/05_2008/warne_on_ganguly/warne-sourav-spat-mars-rajasthan-royals-win.html AND http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/64379/05_2008/gul_on_ganguly/warne-sourav-spat-mars-rajasthan-royals-win.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I think Warne is right and Ganguly is wrong on this occasion. The umpire makes a decision- follow it and don't argue. You are the captain' date=' so set the right examples. Also these delaying techniques of Ganguly are so cheap and annoying. I hope he is punished hard enough.[/quote'] Ganguly did that in Sydney when the umpires went by the 5th umpire Ponting confirming Clarke took the catch cleanly. We all know how clean it was. It's not good Ganguly was lackluster in maintaining timing but there's nothing wrong in asking the umpire to confirm if that was out or not. Particularly when he has had the experience of Clarke claiming and Ponting confirming just about couple of months ago. It's all about experience and going by experience he would rather confirm it from a 3rd umpire than a fella player. Warne talking about spirit of cricket is a joke. However talented or able Warne was one of the worst offender of spirit of cricket in the history of cricket. Warne has absolutely no right to talk about spirit of cricket. Don't mind Smith saying it but Warne talking about it is absolute "NO NO". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cricketics Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 i don't understand one thing. how is asking an umpire to check with 3rd umpire, a sign of unsportingness??? i mean it's not that ganguly is not obeying the umpire.. he is just suggesting to go to tv replay to confirm if it's clearly taken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 i don't understand one thing. how is asking an umpire to check with 3rd umpire, a sign of unsportingness??? i mean it's not that ganguly is not obeying the umpire.. he is just suggesting to go to tv replay to confirm if it's clearly taken No dude - square leg umpire said out....and Ganguly then went to the other umpire and gestured to ask for tv replay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HariSampath Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Ravi....you are comparing apples and oranges when you compare the Clarke catch and the Smith catch yesterday. That was a case of the Umpire not yet taken a decision and just asked the fielder and Ponting about the catch and THEN ruled Ganguly out. In yesterday's match, the straight umpire asked the squareleg umpire about Smith's catch and Rudi CONFIRMED it was clean and a decision was given. Ganguly later said to the straight umpire that it wasnt taken clean and the umpire referred it to the 3rd umpire . This is clearly a case of dissent and Ganguly should be penalised for it. Keep in mind that the batter has NO rights to protest catches either because he thinks he didnt hit it or if he feels the fielder hasnt taken it, its the sole prerogative of the umpire in the middle, here the straight umpire not only messed up bigtime by asking his colleague and then not listening to him, but instead going upstairs, the staright umpire ( or Rudi too) have messed up by not reporting Ganguly for dissent and bringing the game to disrepute. It is only those with blinkered vision who would claim this was an issue of Warne's moral position or Smith's integrity. The most stunning thing was the 3rd umpire actually thought the catch was grassed when even to the normal TV viewer it was obvious the catch was taken clean as a whistle. A case of 2 umpires failing both on the catch decision AND in not penalising ganguly for dissent. Incidentally, what has Warne done to merit the most "unsporting cricketer" tag ? can anyone give a long list of instances when he has played against the spirit of the game ? ( forget about sending txt messages or inadvertently taking some medical substance later found to be prohibited)...I mean "on field incidents " when he was playing cricket. I have been seeing Warne play since his debut series in 1991-2 and I think he is one of the nicest cricketers when it comes to appreciating opponent's game and also in playing in the best spirit of the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HariSampath Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 i don't understand one thing. how is asking an umpire to check with 3rd umpire, a sign of unsportingness??? i mean it's not that ganguly is not obeying the umpire.. he is just suggesting to go to tv replay to confirm if it's clearly taken Ticz...the ICC code of conduct clearly says that once a decision has been confirmed by the umpires on the field , then it is OUT. After that moment, even lingering at the crease is considered dissent, forget about talking to umpires. The same holds good for appealing. If an appeal has been turned down, the bowler better shut up and continue bowling because a decision on the appeal has been GIVEN. The bowler cannot ask the umpires to take another look, ask the 3rd umpire or anything, that is clearly dissent...why, he cant even continue appealing as that is classified as "bringing the game to disrepute". Ganguly should be penalised/fined for dissent, according to the laws existing now and ICC code. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HariSampath Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I think Warne is right and Ganguly is wrong on this occasion. The umpire makes a decision- follow it and don't argue. You are the captain' date=' so set the right examples. Also these delaying techniques of Ganguly are so cheap and annoying. I hope he is punished hard enough.[/quote'] Ganguly delayed his team taking the field, both batting and fielding. According to the laws of the game, the two batters are expected to step onto the field of play within a maximum of 2 minutes from the moment the umpires take position. In the event of a new batsman coming in at the fall of a wkt, he too should be "within the field" within 2 min of the dismissal having been given by the umpire. In the case of KKR openers, they took lots of time to come out to bat, and Warne would have well been in his rights to appeal and both batters would have to be ruled "timed out", according to the laws of the game, but warne did not choose to appeal. ( I remember a test match in England when Windies skipper Clive Lloyd stepped onto to the field with both his pads in his hands as he had not had time to pad up due to quick wickets, he stepped into the filed and then strapped his legguards on, to prevent being given "timed out") Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianRenegade Posted May 2, 2008 Author Share Posted May 2, 2008 Why Warne is right and Gangully is not! First of all, one must note that IPL uses ICC's rules in conducting the IPL t20 championship. i don't understand one thing. how is asking an umpire to check with 3rd umpire, a sign of unsportingness??? i mean it's not that ganguly is not obeying the umpire.. he is just suggesting to go to tv replay to confirm if it's clearly taken Warne had said: "He can't ask for a third umpire after he's given out. He should have accepted that catch was proper". I am not sure whether the umpire had given him out, before calling the third umpire - only those involved can say whether its true or not. But Gangully was wrong, if he had asked for the third umpire either before or after he was given out. This is what ICC's law 3.2.1.f says: In the circumstances detailed in Clauses 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4 and 3.2.5 below, the on-field umpire has the discretion whether or not to refer the appeal to the third umpire for a decision and should take a common sense approach. Players may not appeal to the umpire to use the replay system - breach of this provision would constitute dissent and the player could be liable for discipline under the ICC Code of Conduct. Another point is, I think the Indian umpire went directly to the third umpire, since rudi seems to have thought it was clean. Boriya Majumdhar of times now was shouting at the top of his voice yesterday that no cricketing law in the world said that the umpire must ask the leg umpire, and he can go to the third umpire if he has in doubt. WRONG! What does the law say? (3.2.3.1.a) Should the bowler’s end umpire be unable to decide whether or not a catch was taken cleanly, he shall first consult with the square leg umpire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Incidentally, what has Warne done to merit the most "unsporting cricketer" tag ? can anyone give a long list of instances when he has played against the spirit of the game ? ( forget about sending txt messages or inadvertently taking some medical substance later found to be prohibited)...I mean "on field incidents " when he was playing cricket. I have been seeing Warne play since his debut series in 1991-2 and I think he is one of the nicest cricketers when it comes to appreciating opponent's game and also in playing in the best spirit of the game. Drugs and match fixing relating to the sports isn't enough for you? On field incidents are countless. His debate with the on field umpires and the amount of pressure he used to put on umpires was enormous so much so that a percentage of his wickets should be attributed to over appealing. Just like you do we all have respect for Warne's abilities as a cricketer but we aren't blind enough not to take note of his slip during his playing days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Why Warne is right and Gangully is not! First of all, one must note that IPL uses ICC's rules in conducting the IPL t20 championship. Warne had said: "He can't ask for a third umpire after he's given out. He should have accepted that catch was proper". I am not sure whether the umpire had given him out, before calling the third umpire - only those involved can say whether its true or not. But Gangully was wrong, if he had asked for the third umpire either before or after he was given out. This is what ICC's law 3.2.1.f says: In the circumstances detailed in Clauses 3.2.2, 3.2.3, 3.2.4 and 3.2.5 below, the on-field umpire has the discretion whether or not to refer the appeal to the third umpire for a decision and should take a common sense approach. Players may not appeal to the umpire to use the replay system - breach of this provision would constitute dissent and the player could be liable for discipline under the ICC Code of Conduct. Another point is, I think the Indian umpire went directly to the third umpire, since rudi seems to have thought it was clean. Boriya Majumdhar of times now was shouting at the top of his voice yesterday that no cricketing law in the world said that the umpire must ask the leg umpire, and he can go to the third umpire if he has in doubt. WRONG! What does the law say? (3.2.3.1.a) Should the bowler’s end umpire be unable to decide whether or not a catch was taken cleanly, he shall first consult with the square leg umpire. Good observations and investigation but it still doesn't sound right when Warne comments on Ganguly's breach of spirit of cricket. If the likes of Tendulkar or Jayasuriya or even Smith question Ganguly's action it sounds all right but not the ones like Warne. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianRenegade Posted May 2, 2008 Author Share Posted May 2, 2008 ^ That isn't the point. Had Warne claimed that he has upheld the spirit every time he has played, may be that is debatable. But his claim was gangully didn't play according to the spirit of the game on that occasion. Whether Warne has himself breached the spirit of the game is the past is immaterial. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 I have been seeing Warne play since his debut series in 1991-2 and I think he is one of the nicest cricketers when it comes to appreciating opponent's game and also in playing in the best spirit of the game. I agree. For example, Warne always applauds a good batting performance Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest HariSampath Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Good observations and investigation but it still doesn't sound right when Warne comments on Ganguly's breach of spirit of cricket. If the likes of Tendulkar or Jayasuriya or even Smith question Ganguly's action it sounds all right but not the ones like Warne. Ravi, forget about Warne commenting on ganguly....why dont you simply consider the Ganguly issue independantly. Warne commenting or not doesn't add or detract to the merit of ganguly's case. Its clear that Ganguly was given out, and he protested by asking for the 3rd umpire, which is dissent according to ICC. Are you saying that Warne has no right to comment on a clear breach of ICC rules ? Certainly not, he is the captain of the fielding side. And ganguly being the gulty party is as clear as daylight. Your comparision of the Clarke and Smith catches too are absolutely incorrect as shown earlier. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 Good observations and investigation but it still doesn't sound right when Warne comments on Ganguly's breach of spirit of cricket. If the likes of Tendulkar or Jayasuriya or even Smith question Ganguly's action it sounds all right but not the ones like Warne. ravi, I guess what you and dada are doing is an ad hominem argument....try explaining how dada is right in this case, rather than attacking warne http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IndianRenegade Posted May 2, 2008 Author Share Posted May 2, 2008 ravi, I guess what you and dada are doing is an ad hominem argument....try explaining how dada is right in this case, rather than attacking warne http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem More specifically Tu Quoque, as I pointed earlier: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_hominem_tu_quoque Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swami1984 Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 More specifically Tu Quoque' date=' as I pointed earlier: [url']http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#Ad_hominem_tu_quoque I knew philosophy class would be useful in life! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tapioca Posted May 2, 2008 Share Posted May 2, 2008 but it still doesn't sound right when Warne comments on Ganguly's breach of spirit of cricket. If the likes of Tendulkar or Jayasuriya or even Smith question Ganguly's action it sounds all right but not the ones like Warne. Does it sound right when you and me comment that Dravid and VVSL can't bat in 20/20 ? Or that Ponting is hopeless against spin ? Or even that Aggy and Sami cannot bowl ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts