Hypocrisy much, Aussies? Huss asks NZ to go easy on Clarke

[99.94]

Outsider, you can't just make stuff up. How did McGrath get physical?

[The Outsider]

Outsider' date=' you can't just make stuff up. How did McGrath get physical?[/quote'] I haven't watched the incident recently, but wasn't there a push from McGrath after the over?

[EnterTheVoid]

No other profession except' date=' sports tolerates blatant abuse and disregard for fellow opponents and rightly so.[/quote'] :bird: You lament about the lack of ethics and morality but if the NZ players had sledged Clarke about his personal situation after everything had happened, I am 99.9999999 % confident you'd defend their actions as fair game and retribution for past misdemeanors. For all that preaching you did in that other thread, it would have been appropriate had you said one word in Clarke's defense - after all, you don't want to see another McGrath style incident again right - but nope, not a word. Such deafening silence from the man who views himself as the moral police, the beacon of ethics and morality, I am not surprised.

[Watson87]

Can we seriously drop the McGrath Incident :(( R.I.P Jane McGrath

[99.94]

I haven't watched the incident recently' date=' but wasn't there a push from McGrath after the over?[/quote'] No, he just walks off down to fine leg. However, there was an incident four years prior where Brian Lara shoulder charged McGrath when running between the wickets, and was let off without a hearing/fine/suspension. Then McGrath was fined 3000 dollars after he was found not guilty of spitting at an opponent (Lara claimed McGrath had spat at Adrian Griffiths). OMFG. THIS IS RACISM. THEY ARE LETTING THE BLACK GUY OFF AND THE WHITE GUY GETS FINED FOR DOING NOTHING.

[The Outsider]

:bird: You lament about the lack of ethics and morality but if the NZ players had sledged Clarke about his personal situation after everything had happened, I am 99.9999999 % confident you'd defend their actions as fair game and retribution for past misdemeanors. For all that preaching you did in that other thread, it would have been appropriate had you said one word in Clarke's defense - after all, you don't want to see another McGrath style incident again right - but nope, not a word. Such deafening silence from the man who views himself as the moral police, the beacon of ethics and morality, I am not surprised.

Errr......has such an incident happened? I did not even venture into the thread till it was about some hypothetical sledging NZ would do, only when people like you came out as defenders of sledging to the extent that asking how your colleague's dick tastes like is fair game because his wife has cancer. Why should I defend Clarke - nothing has even happened yet? It's his personal life - I don't think he was even in the wrong that he took time off from cricket to sort out his personal life. But yeah here is the correct analogy - if Clarke make some smart remark about dicks and ****s and some NZ player responds with Bingle's nude pics, I would have no sympathy for Clarke.

[The Outsider]

No, he just walks off down to fine leg.

In that case I retract my comment about the physical part, but it does and should not dilute from the bigger point I am making. You ask me in another thread - what's wrong with sledging - nothing as longs as it is confined to civility and is of the acceptable standards followed in other professions. Tell me frankly, you don't go around asking your coworkers how some other guys' dick tasted like in office or school. Just because you are on a cricket field, it becomes okay? Maybe it does in your twisted definition of witnessing a gladiatorial sport, but I prefer my cricket to be old school.

[99.94]

I guess everyone is different - but I can say if someone had said the same thing to me about a team mate I just would have laughed it off.

[The Outsider]

I guess everyone is different - but I can say if someone had said the same thing to me about a team mate I just would have laughed it off.

Then why couldn't McGrath laugh it off once he was told jovially by Sarwan to ask his wife - oh that's right she had cancer - so everyone's cultural sensibilities are meaningless and yours should be the one around which the laws should be formed? Instead of treading this treacherous path, is it not better to just play the game with the kind of comments which are truly appreciated amongst cultures, there are quite a few of them, rather than go down a risky slope? EDIT : Forget about actual cricket, there are cricket forums who are going to ban you for that kind of language.

[EnterTheVoid]

Errr......has such an incident happened? I did not even venture into the thread till it was about some hypothetical sledging NZ would do, only when people like you came out as defenders of sledging to the extent that asking how your colleague's dick tastes like is fair game because his wife has cancer. Why should I defend Clarke - nothing has even happened yet? It's his personal life - I don't think he was even in the wrong that he took time off from cricket to sort out his personal life. But yeah here is the correct analogy - if Clarke make some smart remark about dicks and ****s and some NZ player responds with Bingle's nude pics, I would have no sympathy for Clarke.

You are hardly in a position to complain when that 3 pages of contradictory mumbo - jumbo is based on hypothetical' and hyperbola. On the one hand, you complain about lack of ethics and morality yet in such a confrontation, you place the blame entirely on the instigator, when the confrontation works both ways. Clarity of thought, just as expected :headshake:

[The Outsider]

On the one hand, you complain about lack of ethics and morality yet in such a confrontation, you place the blame entirely on the instigator, when the confrontation works both ways.

Yeah, I blame it on the instigator, because it's Psychology 101 that the instigator weighs in the pros and cons before initiating a step and the one instigated against reacts instinctively with the worst vitriol he can think of.

[EnterTheVoid]

Yeah' date=' I blame it on the instigator, because it's Psychology 101 that the instigator weighs in the pros and cons before initiating a step and the one instigated against reacts instinctively with the worst vitriol he can think of.[/quote'] Oh I see. So all that preaching excludes the other party in the confrontation when he is just as wrong to respond in kind. Are you serious?

[graphic23]

Sree, I dont think Outsider said anything to you personally. If you cant debate without insulting others, refrain from debates.

[The Outsider]

Oh I see. So all that preaching excludes the other party in the confrontation when he is just as wrong to respond in kind. Are you serious?

Yeah, I am serious. You are a graduate student who I am sure attends a bunch of seminars - try asking someone delivering a talk how his adviser or mentors' dick tasted like and come back with the results of the anthropological experiment? I'll be interested in reading your thoughts and results.

[EnterTheVoid]

Yeah' date=' I am serious. You are a graduate student who I am sure attends a bunch of seminars - try asking someone delivering a talk how his adviser or mentors' dick tasted like and come back with the results of the anthropological experiment? I'll be interested in reading your thoughts and results.[/quote'] All right than. To each his own. I tried.

[The Outsider]

All right than. To each his own. I tried.

You tried asking your seminar speaker how his adviser's dick tastes like? Come on! It's only banter and some sledging, the person should be able to take it in his stride, it's a grown up world, surely he should not react to such comments!

[EnterTheVoid]

You tried asking your seminar speaker how his adviser's dick tastes like? Come on! It's only banter and some sledging' date=' the person should be able to take it in his stride, it's a grown up world, surely he should not react to such comments![/quote'] Pick an analogy thats more relevant to the situation rather than attempt to draw connections between instances where there isn't one. Perhaps, than our conversation would be more meaningful. We'll talk than. Btw, still waiting for a response to this that doesn't involve talks of dicks and what else.

So all that preaching excludes the other party in the confrontation when he is just as wrong to respond in kind.

[The Outsider]

^ It's a pretty apt analogy which suits the civilized world rather than the jaahils who want to witness a gladiatorial contest over skills apt to a sport. I've always responded to that bit above regarding the instigator example.

[EnterTheVoid]

^ It's a pretty apt analogy which suits the civilized world rather than the jaahils who want to witness a gladiatorial contest over skills apt to a sport. I've always responded to that bit above regarding the instigator example.

I will conclude by saying this; When sledging, I don't think grown men need to be spoon fed about what constitutes insults that cross the line. If they need to, than god help this sport. Amen.

[The Outsider]

I will conclude by saying this; When sledging, I don't think grown men need to be spoon fed about what constitutes insults that cross the line. If they need to, than god help this sport. Amen.

I wish I could apply the same barbaric line of thinking across professions which are not sport.