Transition will be Smooth : Srikkanth

[Dinx - the Jinx]

Will there be any more retirements? Leave out such masala questions. Why do you want to get into controversial questions?

Truly Superstar iShtyle

[gs]

Truly Superstar iShtyle

Yeah, truly Thalaivar-esque :haha:

[Guest HariSampath]

Look...I have an important point to make here, for all fans of India cricket. Krish Srikkanth is one of the best ever cricketing personalities you will ever meet in India. Trust me, I know him very very well, have known him extremely close since the 1980/81 season , even before he made his test match debut. He is , in my opinion, the last amateur cricket players ( here, its meant in the sense , that , cricket is a sport...a game, and not to be looked on as a living), he played it in that spirit and sense all through his 14 year first class career and 11 year International career. For those who may wonder what I mean, here is a small example. Cheeka was studying in Engineering college of Guindy, 4th year Engg, in 1980, when he was the center of national attention. A few months earlier, he had been selected to represent South Zone against Imran Khan's Pakistan ( 1979) , Cheeka was 19 years old and 6 FC games old. He just slammed Imran , Sarfraz, Qasim etc to make a run--a-ball 90 on his South zone debut, repeatedly hooking Imran for 4s and 6s, in Hyderabad. It was widely expected that Srikkanth would be taken as the 3rd opener to Australian tour of 1981, especially as there was B&H one day tri series there. Before the team selection in 1980, the Duleep trophy tournament was held, and naturally the focus was on Srikkanth. I was in high school and wildly thrilled by the prospect of Cheeka making it to Australia , and I was a HUGE fan of him at that time....one day as he was dropping me to school in his car, he told me " listen, I am not playing this tournament, I have university exams". I was absolutely stunned and asked him " Cheeka, why ? you are on the verge of selection to tour Australia, you can write exams anytime". He said " No, I care two hoots for all this. This is a sport, a game. I can always play it any time, but my studies are more important and I have to get my engineering degree, cricket can wait" This was the attitude Cheeka had all his life to cricket.... it was a sport, a game, meant to be enjoyed while playing, and so consequently gives enjoyment to others...NOT a means of earning a living, and so I call him the last amateur I have known in the Indian side. Next day I saw in the newspapers that Cheeka was indeed serious as it read " Srikkanth to miss Duleep trophy due to Engg univ exams". He didnt make it to Australia in 1980/81, but made it a few months later into the Indian side.....and had a successful 11 year cricket career. I said all these intimate personal experiences just to give an idea of how Cheeka views cricket itself...he has no time for individual personalities, or any such thing. His philosophy is very simple...as a batter, if a Marshall is bowling 90 mph at you, try to hit him for a 4 or 6...if not get out and let the next man try..dont fret about loss of wicket or records or any such thing...this is basically a sport...a game, people pay money to enjoy...so give entertainment and be competitive to win, and be positive and aggressive always. This is the man, the former opener and India captain that we now have as selector. And he will do EXACTLY as he feels he should do, and care two hoots for what anyone will say, thats what he was always as a player, as a captain an he will be that as a Chief selector too. Cricket is just a game, let everyone who plays to entertain and win..play, and let those who deserve the opportunity at any time get it. Its a simple thing really.

[umpire]

>Cricket is just a game, let everyone who plays to entertain and win..play, and let those who deserve the opportunity at any time get it. Its a simple thing really. hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm how can you win, if you hit Marshal for a 6, 4 and get out? If you can't win, how can you enjoy the game? How to define entertainment, just hitting 4s and 6s. For me batsman defending on tricky pitch (Dravid and Tendulkar in Jo'berg) is as much entertaining as Sehwag hitting 4 bounderiess in an over.

[Guest HariSampath]

Sure it is......just as Gavaskar got 96 in his last inngs.....IF Dravid has got the ability to entertain fans with his defence, AND contribute to wins...so be it...but last 2 years, its not been happening, and its a well known and accepted fact that players like Sehwag and Yuvi and Sachin, who entertain, as well as contribute to wins are the favorites of spectators. It is the attitude I meant when I said " try to hit Marshall for 4 or 6, or leave it to others'.....same way, any player has to aggressively go for win, like Sehwag and Yuvi, SAchin and Dhoni, else move over, let others play and try.

[CC1981]

Its better you keep your mouth shut and have people *think* you are a fool , than to open it and remove all doubt.

Have you considered that the same advice may apply to you ? You asked for my opinion, i gave it. Now you are trying to tell me to STFU - nice !

its obvious you know squat about cricket or for that matter what team sports demand and the goals of selecting teams to fit goals.

Hey dude, let me tell you something - unlike you, i live in a country that has excellent track record in team sports and seen the dynamics of worldbeater teams first hand. So don't lecture me on what high level team sports demand

NO ONE thinks the Dravid of today is a better bet than a Badri, or Rohit or Yuvraj, who are all in cracking form and have years of cricket in them

Who the feck are you to talk for everyone ? God ? No wonder you are such an annoying personality to've rubbed even Ravi the wrong way.

A further dent in your logic ( if at all we can call it that), is the fact NOW is the time to bring in new cricketers into the batting order....with Sehwag, Gambhir, VVS , Sachin, all in craking form, with Dhoni as well...and also as a bonus, even Zaheer and Harbhajan contributing 50s....

Form is temporary. Class is permanent. So far, the only players we can rely on are Sehwag, an inconsistent batsman, Tendulkar, a fading giant and Laxman - who is good but not great. Dhoni, Gambhir etc. are all yet to establish themselves in the test arena as class batsmen - a couple of decent series doesnt change the fact that they are noobies and putting in too many noobies is not a smooth transition.

Badri and Rohit , as well as Yuvraj and raina have been around for a while and are not exactly "newbies" to Intl cricket.

Yuvy apart, they are all utter noobies in test cricket. You are a fool to contest that.

and trust me you know NOTHING about cricket

As i said before, the feeling is mutual, so let it go and move on - ti contributes nothing to the discussion.

his calls on cricketing judgments etc have been acclaimed by far better men than you.

Unlike you, i do not base my opinions of someone based on what other men think of them. That'd be called being a posse - something that suits you perhaps, but doesnt for an independent thinker like me.

Cheeka has been described by no less a person than Gavaskar , as a "player that every captain would like to have and a captain every player would like to have"....and if that is not a top compliment for a former India captain to be a chief selector...I am afraid, this is yet another instance and proof of your rather evident lack of intelligence.

I agree with Gavaskar - cheeka was a brilliant personality that anyone would love to have around. Still doesnt mean he actually has a brain inside his skull and having watched him bat, i am positive he is no better than Afridi - a total retard when it comes to batting. He may be your personal friend and thus you may be biassed, but don't try to sell me the idea that Cheeka is smart - there wasnt an ounce of smartness in his batting through his entire career.

[Sooda]

Id drop Dravid -I dont think blooding two 'youngsters' is too much of an ask. Especially given that the next series is at home. Badrinath, the next in line, is new yes but the other bat coming in should really be Kaif, or Yuvraj (whom id like to see given a good run- if he fails drop him for good). Neither of them is new to internationals. Badri himself is an experienced player, not at intl level of course. GG, VS, VVSL, SRT, MK/Yuv, Badri But i think id like Sehwag to play in the middle order in the coming years for a) experience in the mid order and b) a quick middle order run scorer. GG, MVijay, VVSL, SRT, VS, Badri ...?

[Guest HariSampath]

Have you considered that the same advice may apply to you ? You asked for my opinion, i gave it. Now you are trying to tell me to STFU - nice ! Hey dude, let me tell you something - unlike you, i live in a country that has excellent track record in team sports and seen the dynamics of worldbeater teams first hand. So don't lecture me on what high level team sports demand - tell me when your pathetic nation of 1 billion people can actually put together a semi-decent squad in a team sport. Who the feck are you to talk for everyone ? God ? No wonder you are such an annoying personality to've rubbed even Ravi the wrong way. Form is temporary. Class is permanent. So far, the only players we can rely on are Sehwag, an inconsistent batsman, Tendulkar, a fading giant and Laxman - who is good but not great. Dhoni, Gambhir etc. are all yet to establish themselves in the test arena as class batsmen - a couple of decent series doesnt change the fact that they are noobies and putting in too many noobies is not a smooth transition. Yuvy apart, they are all utter noobies in test cricket. You are a fool to contest that. As i said before, the feeling is mutual, so let it go and move on - ti contributes nothing to the discussion. Unlike you, i do not base my opinions of someone based on what other men think of them. That'd be called being a posse - something that suits you perhaps, but doesnt for an independent thinker like me. I agree with Gavaskar - cheeka was a brilliant personality that anyone would love to have around. Still doesnt mean he actually has a brain inside his skull and having watched him bat, i am positive he is no better than Afridi - a total retard when it comes to batting. He may be your personal friend and thus you may be biassed, but don't try to sell me the idea that Cheeka is smart - there wasnt an ounce of smartness in his batting through his entire career.

I can settle this argument of Dravid with just 2 points. As a top order batter for India , he is expected to play innings that Immensely make a difference to the batting fortunes of his team, at least once in 4-5 innings, thats the basic criterion for the Sachins , Dravid, Haydens, Laras , Pontings et al. All other standards are for the 3-4 years, or 30-40 test old players. In the case of top batters, there have been form slumps before, and there will be in future, no questions. But the key is in identifying what is a mere form slump and what is an irreversible process that has set in. Applying this framework, Dravid's contribution to India has to be analyzed; and it happens that Dravid has undergone the irreversible process long back. ( see my write up for the details since the 2006 SAF series). For a top order player to just contribute ONE match impacting innings over past 25 tests and 45 innings is an abysmal failure. Point established, he has to go. If we now analyze your claim that you *dont* consider Dravid as a given , as I charge that you do, lets analyze your position. You start off with the argument that Dravid can bat at #5 without settling the issue of whether he merits a place in the side in the first place (you need to settle this point with facts, fiigures, and not vague assumptions). And then you go on to propose your 45 average theory from *here on*...why ? . Just apply the same criterion to just after the home series against Pakistan , by which time Dravid had ALREADY failed in 3 full test series. That would have meant we drop him after EVERY series, but he has still played 4 full series after that, and has repeatedly shown us that any trust/hope placed in his potential to perform are grossly misplaced. So, it stands established that you dont apply any defined standards for playing in the test 11 , but instead just propose a batting place for Dravid, meaning you somehow try to accommodate him somewhere IRRESPECTIVE of his performance of 2 years, which is what I say , you consider Dravid as a *given* . Point established. Next you start out with the assumption that two new faces in the middle order should not be there, in view of Ganguly too retiring. This is an extension of the argument that assumes without justification that new faces are automatically expected to fail. Wrong. If this is a valid argument in cricket, then we have to see whether it applies logically for all formats of the game. It does NOT. India's successes in ALL versions of the game in the past year has been engineered NOT by the seasoned campaigners , but by the lesser experienced players like Gambhir, Ishant, and the younger gen. If the argument is that in the test format alone we need seniors more than juniors, then too the argument falls flat as it was the SENIORS who were all comprehensively cleaned up in SL. And the younger lot did far better. Moreover, you seem to assume that an extra junior being brought in for a non performing senior is disastrous and not even to be touched upon. Wrong, my batting line up would have Sehwag, Gambhir , VVS, Sachin as 4 of the top 5...that is plenty of experience and tons of runs and match winning performances by EACH of them ...and then my batting is going to have Dhoni , Harbhajan and Zaheere too in the lower order, all of them getting crucial 50s very often in crucial games. So we have 7 of the top 8 in the batting order who can do the jobs expected of their batting positions MORE than capably. In this scenario, a Yuvraj or a Badri or Rohit/Raina being slotted in between this for #5 , and allowing us to play 5 bowlers is the best way to go. EVEN if we play with 6 specialist batters, that top 4 I mentioned plus Yuvraj and Rohit, or any of the others, is 2 places well filled , and Dravid in his form of last 2 years is no way better than this option. Finally , your assertion that "If Ganguly were to be there,I would drop Dravid" , has to be examined. If this argument had to be applied, then Dravid should have been dropped at the begining of this series, as Ganguly was very much there, and we should have blooded a "new face". Right ? Because by the begining of this series Dravid had already failed 5 test series running. That way we would have had one "new face in this series", and one more , next series. But it wasnt done, and Dravid was given that extra series , and has performed even worse than all his earlier test series. So if you are to have any logic, you should drop him NOW. Now, coming to Cheeka and his "cricket smartness". Lets differentiate between applying smartness to a specific skill like batting/bowling or analyzing smartness overall. Even here, Srikkanth was a really smart ODI batter, who was perhaps the first to break out of orthodoxy and start off hitting great fast bowlers over the top, in the early 1980s...a FULL 15 years before Sanath jayasuriya perfected the art in 1996. Even in the 1992 world cup, NZ experimenting with Mark Greatbatch to hit over the top, and so many other countries trying it out , was a full 10 years after Cheeka had pioneered this aspect of opening batting in international cricket. And remember, Cheeka played his cricket in an era of the Roberts, Marshalls, Bothams, Willis, Imrans, Hadlees et al. AND he did so in an era where field restrictions did not apply as they came to be done in the 1990s. I would say that this was wonderful cricketing thinking, something that has never got due recognition. Now lets analyze his cricket smartness a bit more. Srikkanth was the first person to propose the idea of " roving overs" in ODI cricket to ICC when he was a member of the ICC technical committee, a concept that was accepted 3 years later and brought in as what we have now as power plays. This is a matter of public knowledge and I was personally involved with drafting 2 proposals along with him, the other being allowing a captain who loses the toss to have an option of making one change in the playing 11, to even out the advantage of the toss. This was attempted by ICC as "super sub", but not in the way we originally drafted it, and so it failed. Srikkanth's original proposal still stands with the ICC and I can tell you it will certainly be adopted by the WC 2011. , now lets rethink whether Srikkanth is indeed "cricket smart"...I think many would agree he is...not just smart, but cricket brilliant I would say. Lets now take his cricketing judgment. We all know how much he was rooting for Sehwag for the Aussie tour and how Sehwag was ignored even for probables. When Sehwag was later selected, Srikanth has been on record, here too at ICF saying that he must be played in all 4 tests. Sehwag was not, and see how it impacted that series. Even now as a Chief selector, everyone knows how much Srikkanth was supportive of Dhoni as captain, in fact he has been advocating this since last 1 year, and very much vocally after SL. That exactly is what is happening. It was Cheeka , who overturned Vengsarkar's decision to drop Saurav and brought him back for this series...this too is a mtter of public record , and Ganguly himself had said " wish this committee had been there 3 years back"....and see how it has paid off...great returns. If you need to know Ganguly's take on this, just check with Snehasis who is known to you , you say. Yet another decision to go in with an unknown Murali Vijay has also met with wide apprval from all the top cricket experts. And finally , just read his above interview...before concluding that Srikkanth is a dumbo on cricket....He is a brilliantly thinking cricket brain. I rest my case.

[CC1981]

Wow Hari, you do write a load of crap - i get the feeling you are too busy ranting to read what others are posting. Take this for example :

As a top order batter for India

I said clearly, i'd drop him down the order to 5 or 6, bump Laxman up to 3 and wait for a newbie to solidify his position over the next 5-8 tests before dropping Dravid. Therefore, the next few hundred words you wrote, are utterly redundant and trash.

And then you go on to propose your 45 average theory from *here on*...why ?

because what Dravid did 10 tests ago is irrelevant - if we'd dropped him then and waited for another newbie to solidify himself before Gangs retired, i'd not be too miffed. But right now, Ganguly is retiring, meaning one newbie has to establish himself in the top six. Gambhir is new and we've always had problems with our #2 opener post Sehwag, so thats 2 outta top 6 that need to establish themselves. Tendy is in fine form, but i dont expect him to carry the middle order all the time like he did in the 90s and Laxman is a good but not great player- i dont expect more than the occasional ton from him. Sehwag can get humongous scores, but he isnt mr consistent, who'll score huge every series. So dropping Dravid right away means our batting order becomes too weak and a very sudden and huge transition for our batting lineup than a smooth one that Cheeka is supposedly claiming. If that isnt logic for you, i doubt you have a single grey cell in your brain that comprehends logic - and like i said before, don't lecture me on what team sports 'big picture' is like - this is the sort of decision that Australia or big teams take, something that is clearly foreign to the so-called thinkers from a place which has never produced a quality team in any sport.

Just apply the same criterion to just after the home series against Pakistan , by which time Dravid had ALREADY failed in 3 full test series. That would have meant we drop him after EVERY series, but he has still played 4 full series after that, and has repeatedly shown us that any trust/hope placed in his potential to perform are grossly misplaced. So, it stands established that you dont apply any defined standards for playing in the test 11 , but instead just propose a batting place for Dravid, meaning you somehow try to accommodate him somewhere IRRESPECTIVE of his performance of 2 years, which is what I say , you consider Dravid as a *given* . Point established

blahblahblah. All rubbish. Rubbish because it is irrelevant to what is the best course of action TODAY. like i said, stop using the past when its detrimental to the future. Two newbies straight off the bat is a worse option than letting one newbie establish, sending Dravid down the order and then replacing him if he doesnt score in another 4-5 tests. That is the bottomline. That is what any quality team will do and i can certainly show you many many examples of quality teams doing that for a class player who's fading during a transition period, inorder to stop a too-sudden change. Clearly, something you have no concept of, but then again, you are one of the many retards who thinks a player is established after one or two odd series.

If this argument had to be applied, then Dravid should have been dropped at the begining of this series, as Ganguly was very much there, and we should have blooded a "new face". Right ?

Key word: If. Like i said, i dont live in the past. I live in the present and you posed me the question two days ago. Like i said old man, let the past go - try knocking some pragmatism in your brain and think purely on terms of 'whats best for now - throwing two newbies to the sharks and ushering in sudden change when the team is doing okay or taking it easy for another 2 series and ushering in a change gradually'. That is the kind of champion-mentality thinking that you are showing an utter incapability in reproducing- but then again, given your idea of what a quality sporting team dynamics are like, i can't say i am surprised. Pity India is too full of reactionary idiots like you and maybe thats why we've not produced a single great team in any sport in the professional era. The idea i presented - dropping Dravid down the order, waiting for one newbie to establish himself and then making it do-or-die for Dravid is a formula that the WI team of the past tried ( Lloyd dropped down the order, Kalli retired, then lloyd eased out - Richards dropped down the order) , it's been tried by England in the past, its been tried all the time (with success) by class hockey teams like Red Wings or Devils. Clearly, that kind of champion mentality is lacking in your case, because you are an idiot, too caught up in numbers, too caught up in the past to realize that the bottomline is, droppin Dravid down the order + blooding a newbie + waiting Gambhir to establish himself > dropping dravid + 2 newbies + Gambhir establishing himself. That is the bottomline and i am afraid, you are too dogmatic and illogical to realize that.

Lets differentiate between applying smartness to a specific skill like batting/bowling or analyzing smartness overall. Even here, Srikkanth was a really smart ODI batter, who was perhaps the first to break out of orthodoxy and start off hitting great fast bowlers over the top, in the early 1980s...a FULL 15 years before Sanath jayasuriya perfected the art in 1996.

Blahblahblah. Look, i am not interested in the defence of your personal acquaintance and a hero. I have zero issues with his ODI batting- i maintain that he batted like a moron throughout his test career and i know for a fact that i am not alone in thinking that. Rest of your post is irrelevant goobledegook thats nothing more than childing 'sticking up for your pal' nonsense. I don't care if Srikkanth is actually smart or not - my impression of him is that of a buffoon and so far i've seen nothing to change that. And its irrelevant largely, because Cheeka is not the guy in the middle anymore. Star-power may impress you, it doesnt for me. Anyways, i have no more time for a dogmatic fool like you on this topic- you asked what i'd do, i told you what i'd do. Unfortunately, you are too much of a retarded dogmatic moron to consider others' ideas, instead you are too keen to shove your idea down others gullet, in some mistaken superiority complex of supposedly knowing how a 'great team' is built - which i find is ironic, because then you must be the ONLY Indian who knows how a great team is built, given how Indians have very little credibility in building great teams in ANY sport. You asked about my idea - i told you what my idea is. If you don't like it, tuff. I don't care if you think your idea is better- i still think it sucks, its foolhardy, its reckless and it is reactionary. Regardless of whether Dravid is dropped and a newbie does better or not, it will not change my opinion about your stupid idea. Now, i have better things to do than argue with an old fool who cannot distinguish between the present/future and the past with logic and best case scenario in mind.

[Guest HariSampath]

Unalloyed rubbish Let me try to summarise your reams of rubbish into one sentence of rubbish. You are basically replacing Saurav Ganguly with Rahul Dravid. That is because, according to you, if Ganguly plays the next test, you would unhesitatingly drop Dravid AND bring in one youngster . Because Ganguly is not playing, you want to keep Dravid and bring in one youngster. So you are fine with one youngster, and basically you are replacing Ganguly with Dravid. Which brings us to the question : Is Dravid , with the form of last 2 years and 25 tests of comprehensive failure, the best replacement for Ganguly who has outperformed Dravid by a mile and a half ? or is a replacement for Ganguly better off if he were a youngster like Badri, Rohit, or even an experienced player like Yuvraj . You say Dravid at 5. I say Yuvraj at 5. Lets put this into specifics. Let me choose a 12 for the next test match. You do the same, and lets see which 12 has better flexibility for choosing a 11 in order to win a test match. My 12 would be as follows 1. Sehwag 2. Gambhir 3. VVS 4. Sachin 5. Yuvraj 6. Dhoni © 7. Murali Vijay 8. Harbhajan 9. Zaheer Khan 10. Ishant Sharma 11. Mishra 12. Munaf Patel If we play with 5 bowlers, then Vijay sits out. If we decide to go with 4 bowlers, Munaf sits out and Vijay plays at #3. Let me see how your 12 is suited best for the next test match.

[CC1981]

Let me see how your 12 is suited best for the next test match.

Hey moron, i already said that if you refuse to address the reasoning in my post and try purile tactics with my words, this conversation is over. I really don't have the time to utterly dress you down on this. Unlike you, i have a life.

[Guest HariSampath]

Ok, so u accept that you dont have a thing to say, and ( as usual ) resort to name calling.....its not a good excuse, and everyone here can see how your " logic" has been exposed....so do you want me to quote your own words from this thread ? That you would have unhesitatingly dropped Dravid if Ganguly were playing ? everyone can see it above, anyways I have addressed your so called rationale behind selecting Dravid....AND I have demolished your "reasoning"...it all comes down to what your 12 will be, as you are advocating reasons behind team selection.....so , go ahead...IF you have what it takes...some intellectual guts, that is, and name a 12...and lets see...

[Rajan]

attention Mods: This is atrocious, why no action?

Have you considered that the same advice may apply to you ? You asked for my opinion, i gave it. Now you are trying to tell me to STFU - nice ! Hey dude, let me tell you something - unlike you, i live in a country that has excellent track record in team sports and seen the dynamics of worldbeater teams first hand. So don't lecture me on what high level team sports demand - tell me when your pathetic nation of 1 billion people can actually put together a semi-decent squad in a team sport. I agree with Gavaskar - cheeka was a brilliant personality that anyone would love to have around. Still doesnt mean he actually has a brain inside his skull and having watched him bat, i am positive he is no better than Afridi - a total retard when it comes to batting. He may be your personal friend and thus you may be biassed, but don't try to sell me the idea that Cheeka is smart - there wasnt an ounce of smartness in his batting through his entire career.

I hope the moderators follow the discussion regularly. in case this was missed, I request you to please take necessary action on this member. I dont understand how is it fair to condemn a whole country as 'pathetic nation" when u disagree with another member? it is arrogant and highly condemnable.most of the members would have jumped up and down if a Pakistani or aussie forummer had made the same comment. how can u allow an indian to post this? if some one has migrated seeking greener pastures, it is perfectly alright. it is also fine if they r enamored by the facilities offered there. but why call India a 'pathetic nation"? thats unnecessarily hitting below the belt and uncalled for.

[Dinx - the Jinx]

I hope the moderators follow the discussion regularly. in case this was missed' date= I request you to please take necessary action on this member. I dont understand how is it fair to condemn a whole country as 'pathetic nation" when u disagree with another member? it is arrogant and highly condemnable.most of the members would have jumped up and down if a Pakistani or aussie forummer had made the same comment. how can u allow an indian to post this? if some one has migrated seeking greener pastures, it is perfectly alright. it is also fine if they r enamored by the facilities offered there. but why call India a 'pathetic nation"? thats unnecessarily hitting below the belt and uncalled for.

Rajan - I second that notion. @ Mods: We do not want people who constantly abuse the country, its culture, its internal affairs. Even if its coming from an Indian living abroad, its highly condemnable. It hurts. We are ready and open to welcome Aussies and Pakistanis in the forum because of the valuable insights and point of views that they bring to the discussion. However reading posts like the one Rajan has pointed now, makes you feel really hurt. And we dont come to this site to read such bad comments about our country and feel sick. If this continues, probably I may stop coming back to this site, and I think I'm not the only one in this forum who carries that sentiment. So before it gets out of hand, please act and act fast