The Outsider Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 Let's forget about Ponting's sportsmanship etc. , I think it was a pretty daft decision to make this arrangement given the fact that most of these instances happen at slips and in Australia only one team would have managed more nicks than the other. Link to comment
suraj Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 There is nothing to forget about Ponting's sportsmanship; how can you forget something that does not exist?? The agreement= Yudishtir's (Kumble's) promise to Kauravs (Ponting & co.) Link to comment
The Outsider Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 But when Kumble made the agreement he must have assumed Ponting would play fair on this part. That he did not is a different matter, but cricketing logic suggests that anything where the majority of the decisions are concerned with slip fielders India should not have been a party to in the first place. Link to comment
Brainfade Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 But when Kumble made the agreement he must have assumed Ponting would play fair on this part. That he did not is a different matter' date=' but cricketing logic suggests that anything where the majority of the decisions are concerned with slip fielders India should not have been a party to in the first place.[/quote'] It is a mistake made by a true gentleman. He may not have thought it through as much as you have. We, of course, have the benefit of hindsight. This is a lesson for Dhoni and other future Indian captains. On a related note, this may be the kind of thing where the presence of a Gary Kirsten would help. Link to comment
Ram Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 I think the deal itself is quite naive in the first place, especially in today's times when Technology is so pervasive in sport. There will obvious moments when one team feels it deserves a referral to the 3rd umpire, like Ganguly's dismissal in the 2nd innings. Link to comment
siddhu Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 no fielding captain should make calls like this... it was a ridiculous deal to begin with. I hope that Kumble says to Ponting that he is not going to abide by the "deal" and he will only make the umpires (including 3rd) to make the decisions... Link to comment
Donny Posted January 9, 2008 Share Posted January 9, 2008 The point you all seem to be missing is Anil DID make this agreement. Whether it was naive or not is not the issue. mm, this: "There will obvious moments when one team feels it deserves a referral to the 3rd umpire, like Ganguly's dismissal in the 2nd innings." was cancelled out by the agreement. Link to comment
The Outsider Posted January 9, 2008 Author Share Posted January 9, 2008 The point you all seem to be missing is Anil DID make this agreement. Whether it was naive or not is not the issue. mm, this: "There will obvious moments when one team feels it deserves a referral to the 3rd umpire, like Ganguly's dismissal in the 2nd innings." was cancelled out by the agreement. No you are missing the point, Donny. The agreement was negated first by Ponting claiming a bump catch off Dhoni and then by Ganguly standing his ground. There was nothing in the agreement involving umpires. If a batsman stays his ground, the umpire has to follow the rule book, which he obviously did not. Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now