Jump to content

ICC set to take action against Gavaskar: Reports; and now Cricket Australia snubs Sunny Gavaskar?

talksport

By talksport
in Cricket Talk

Recommended Posts

fineleg Rookie

fineleg

Posted
Posted
None of his decisions were nearly as bad as Bucknor plus Bucknor has been incompetent for the last few years. Lets run through Benson's mistakes - Ponting caught behind off Ganguly- Not given - Ponting with an inside edge on the pad- Given - Sachin LBW off M Clarke- Not given - Laxman LBW off Lee- Not given - Hussey caught behind off Sharma- Not given - Hayden or Hussey LBW- not given ---------------------------------------------------- Ganguly catch- given( based on the agreement between the captains None of those mistakes were as bad as Symonds's caught behind or Dravid's dismissal plus his mistakes weren't one sided .he also had a fairly decent match in Melbourne and overall is an ok umpire.
:omg: They were! Especially Ganguly catch- given( based on the agreement between the captains Umpires are not part of the agreement, SG stood his ground, agreement finito!
Link to comment
MundaPakistani Newbie

MundaPakistani

Posted
Posted
:omg: They were!!
:hmmmm2: How were they any different from a regular "umpiring error"? Sure Benson had a bad game but were his decisions totally one sided? certainly not. Has Benson been performing poorly for YEARS like Mr. Bucknor? certainly not. Has a team ever complained about Benson being biased? No. So based on those facts if media doesn't slam Benson in the same way as they slammed Bucknor then are they doing it because of Benson's lighter skin color? ...YES according to Mr. Gavaskar.
Especially Ganguly catch- given( based on the agreement between the captains Umpires are not part of the agreement, SG stood his ground, agreement finito!
Forget about being a "blunder" IMO that wasn't even a "bad" decision. The captains had already decided before the series that if there is a debatable catch then the fielder's word will be taken so obviously the umps were aware of that deal and took the fielder's word....any thing wrong with that? certainly not.
Link to comment
IndianRenegade Grand Master

IndianRenegade

Posted
Posted
Forget about being a "blunder" IMO that wasn't even a "bad" decision. The captains had already decided before the series that if there is a debatable catch then the fielder's word will be taken so obviously the umps were aware of that deal and took the fielder's word....any thing wrong with that? certainly not.
Everything was wrong with that. The agreement was made between players, had Gangully walked away we would have had no problems, other than that Clarke took a controversial catch. But when he stood his ground and Benson himself was unsure, this being the case, in accordance with Law 3.2.3, he should have asked Bucknor, in case he was unclear he should have gone to the third umpire. Benson completely flouted the clauses of Law 3.2.3 by going by the word of the opposition captain.
Link to comment
Ram Newbie

Ram

Posted
Posted

If i were Gavaskar, I would consider the Ind-Aus trophy being named Border-Gavaskar a joke played on me. Its obvious that the Aussies dont want to respect Sunny too much, especially after his comments on the Hookes' death, Australia's bully-like behavior on the field and his recent comments against Ponting while on commentary for Star. That they didnt invite him to hand out the trophy, even though he was present in the ground, is the biggest possible snub he could have had. Even in Star, I noticed, when Matthew Hayden was interviewed in an end-of-a-day session by Harsha and other Star team, Sunny was the last to ask a question, like he really didnt want to. And even the question he asked, was a pathetic one ( Matthew, what do you talk with your slips when you are bored ? Do you talk about family, food etc ? ), just confirming that he would rather not converse with any of the Aussie players, knowing that the Aussies, presently, have no love lost for him.

Link to comment
Kartikey Newbie

Kartikey

Posted
Posted
If i were Gavaskar' date=' I would consider the Ind-Aus trophy being named Border-Gavaskar a joke played on me. Its obvious that the Aussies dont want to respect Sunny too much, especially after his comments on the [b']Lehmann's death, Australia's bully-like behavior on the field and his recent comments against Ponting while on commentary for Star. That they didnt invite him to hand out the trophy, even though he was present in the ground, is the biggest possible snub he could have had. Even in Star, I noticed, when Matthew Hayden was interviewed in an end-of-a-day session by Harsha and other Star team, Sunny was the last to ask a question, like he really didnt want to. And even the question he asked, was a pathetic one ( Matthew, what do you talk with your slips when you are bored ? Do you talk about family, food etc ? ), just confirming that he would rather not converse with any of the Aussie players, knowing that the Aussies, presently, have no love lost for him.
u mean Hookes, right?
Link to comment
Chandan Newbie

Chandan

Posted
Posted
......and who said that he did?? some of the posts on this thread are seriously confusing and gives me an indication that some people aren't fully understanding the issue.
Actually the whole ruckus started when Richards and Reid called Gavaskar racist for this column and then ICC fuelled by needlessly telling the media that they'd take action against Gavasker for calling Proctor racist, when he hasn't said that anywhere. It is Richards's, Reid's and Morgan's understanding which is under question..
Link to comment

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...