Is 'ordinary' an inappropriate word?

[achilles]

^ It's a bit different with tennis because that is an indiviidual sport.

No. I think sport is sport. The basic essence of sport lies in sportsmanship. The very reason why :punter: copes with so much stick is coz, unlike a Rahul Dravid or a compatriot Mark Taylor, he just doesn't let the bygones be bygones and get on with the game. He thinks everytime his team appeals, the umpire must give the batsman out. And his umpteen run-ins with the umpire & the opposition provide a sorry picture to the world, isn't it? But, I like Hauritz. Very decent fellow. Silence is a virtue.

[Bradman99]

No. I think sport is sport. The basic essence of sport lies in sportsmanship. The very reason why :punter: copes with so much stick is coz, unlike a Rahul Dravid or a compatriot Mark Taylor, he just doesn't let the bygones be bygones and get on with the game. He thinks everytime his team appeals, the umpire must give the batsman out. And his umpteen run-ins with the umpire & the opposition provide a sorry picture to the world, isn't it? But, I like Hauritz. Very decent fellow. Silence is a virtue.

The difference is though if a tennis player calls another tennis player crap he is single handedly picking on that player. If a cricketer calls another team ordinary, it is not the same as a tennis player calling another tennis player ordinary. He is using it to describe the whole team, not just the one player only. As for Ponting we all know that he isn't the most popular fellow and his reputation amongst others (particularly Indians) is beyond repair so no matter what he does from this stage on he will always be seen in a bad way.

[thevortex]

Obviously not. Have you heard him speak? Regarding this topic, I personally think it is not appropriate to call your opponents "ordinary", unless it is a smash mouth talking sport like Wrestling or Boxing. You will never hear a Federer calling his opponent Ordinary or a Tendulkar/Dravid calling a team ordinary. I guess some people consider it as speaking your mind others like me call it being (im)polite. Depends on which of these two you value more in your life.

That is actually unfair, Yoda. Gambhir speaks very well. I heard him speak yesterday after the match and was floored by his prudent yet adequate responses. He is not all bad. On that basis I dont find it very unbelievable that he wrote this himself. He still may not have but I wont rule out the possibility of him ever being able to write such a piece. About the whole politeness thing, yes its personal. Federer wont. But Serena will. I dont agree with Serena. In this case, Gambhir was not pronouncing some sort of thing which nobody had no idea of. The Rajasthan team is indeed an ordinary one when you consider the individuals. They gelled well as a team in the first edition. But they have been found wanting since. There is always a limit as to what a captain can do given that any captain is only as good as his team. Delhi is a far superior unit as is Mumbai or Bangalore. When compared to Rajasthan, I mean.

[flamy]

Great, now people have problems with honesty, lal.

[teacup]

For a moment, forget the appropriateness of his "Ordinary" comment. Instead, consider the validity of the statement. Did the Delhi Daredevils make it to the semifinals of the CL '09? No. A team from Trinidad and Tobago did. Did Delhi Daredevils make it to the final of any of the last two IPLs? No. Would you consider the sum of the individual parts to be greater than the whole? No. So, on what basis was Gotham City passing judgement publicly on an IPL team that at worst is only as good as his own team? Where was he when the three top IPL teams, including DD, were outclassed by domestic teams from Australia, SAF and WI in the CL? Even the English county team was better than the IPL teams. How come there was no comment then from him about how ordinary IPL, on the whole, was in terms of quality? Nothing has changed since CL 2009. Many catches are dropped, fielding lapses are still plenty and bowling on the whole lacks imagination and control. In this context, should we then take Gotham city's statement as RR being a ordinary side in a ordinary league playing an ordinary format? That's like a C grader calling a D grader ordinary.

[teacup]

You're criticizing him as if Gautam is some calculating media professional who carefully crafts his words and gets them evaluated before speaking up. His remarks were purely in context of the match and there's no need to bring in Royal's previous successes and other irrelevant and extraneous stuff.

Well...if he writes nonsense he should expect criticism. The 2010 season is not over yet for the Royals, they still have a good chance of going all the way. That is one good enough reason to look into their previous performances to maybe find some rationale behind his statement. And Btw, what other irrelevant and extraneous stuff did you find in that post?

Gautum City Gambhir was asked about Rajasthan, he said they were ordinary, actually he said this, “I think Rajasthan was never a threat. Except for Yusuf Pathan, the other guys were pretty ordinary. We thought Yusuf was the only danger-man and didn’t bother too much about anyone elseâ€.

That doesn't sound like it was "purely" in context of the match.

[yoda]

Great' date=' now people have problems with honesty, lal.[/quote'] If everyone told everyone else how exactly they felt about the other person all the time, the world would be a horrible place. This is not honesty, this is called speaking from your behind. He is no expert on determining quality of teams. His own team needed a KKD blinder to come of that very same match as a winner.

[thevortex]

The question is not about whether Gambhir spoke the absolute truth - again given that truth is in any case subjective in the case of such sports anyway:). It is about whether he could really speak his mind or not. Why do we have to treat sportspeople as if they were visiting ambassadors of foreign powers which might attack our country at any time? Perhaps we must all remember that there has not been a word from Warne on this subject while all of us indulging ourselves!

[Chandan]

Gambhir got a raw deal : Harsha Bhogle Gambhir got a raw deal Gambhir got a raw deal Reprimanding players for honest observations will just lead to more boring, vanilla statements than we already get Harsha Bhogle April 9, 2010 The IPL reprimanding Gautam Gambhir for calling his opponents "ordinary" was unfortunate and unnecessary. He was not abusive, he did not insult them, there was nothing racist about it. He used a word that all of us do, and most important, he was absolutely right in his assessment. The Rajasthan Royals were ordinary against the Delhi Daredevils that day and I'm sure they knew it. Their captain often admits to his team's deficiencies and on his Twitter page is quite open with his thoughts. Politicians, of whom many aspire to positions in the BCCI, are far more unforgiving of opponents and incomparably more scathing in their choice of words. Indeed, Gambhir's comments in his column the next day were quite refreshing if a bit vitriolic. He was entitled to feel that way, and a man is allowed to stand up for his views. He admitted that his team were called ordinary too, after their performance against the Mumbai Indians, that they accepted it and came back strongly. Indeed, the irony is that the Royals themselves came back a better team, and by showing what they were capable of, only reinforced Gambhir's assessment of their performance against the Delhi Daredevils. I found the response to Gambhir baffling. A lot of us played as much sport as we did, and invited many others to play it, because it was unforgiving and brought us face to face with reality. It is such a magnificent activity because you have to take criticism on the chin and bounce back; and bounce back on the field of play, where, once again, there are no favours handed out, no quarters given. To reprimand someone for a perfectly legitimate opinion is to miss the essence of all sport. Respect is earned on a field of play and it is earned in both dressing rooms, not only your own. And it strikes me as particularly baffling that players seem to get away with abuse on a field, with insulting language, but cannot make an honest observation off it. It has wider implications. I fear it could only lead to more boring, vanilla statements of the sort we now get at press conferences. The audience, who are the real owners of a sport, want to know what a sportsman is thinking, they want his assessment, and they have a right to that knowledge. Otherwise we will get what passes for cricketer-written columns in our newspapers: bland, insipid and flat statements that do not tell us why the owner of the byline is an exceptional performer, do not allow us a little window into his mind. Gambhir allowed us that and was told to stand in a corner. ------------------------------------------------------- I think many of us have discussed this and have had the same opinion as that of harsha, though some disagreed as well. Perhaps the people who disagreed prefer those "vanilla comments" as Harsha calls it. But I found two interesting comments on this article on Prem Panicker's blog Smoke signal

Agree with thrust of his remarks, but as always, am uncomfortable with statements like “The audience, who are the real owners of a sport…” and “…they have a right to that knowledge.” When sport is treated as “public property”, it just ends up becoming an unresponsive politician or bureaucrat’s property. As it is in all other sports in India. And statements like “right to that knowledge” are just as populist as right to employment or right to education. Sure, nobody can take it from the consumer, but nobody has an obligation to provide it to you either. As we had discussed earlier on Twitter, allowing such comments could make the IPL more interesting and thus makes sound business sense. That is the argument I buy.

I’m with you on this. That said' date=' the problem is with the sweeping nature of the statements. There is a middle ground between opening up all information to the public [including, presumably, bookies and other unseen stakeholders'], and giving them pre-digested pap, and I suspect that is the middle ground Harsha too would like to see. I’d like to see more people talk like Gautam, for two reasons. One is what you mention. The other, and it is kind of related to your point, is that in brand building, there is increasingly a definite downside to treating the public like idiots, and feeding them pap. So I guess it is not really two reasons, but an elaboration on the point you make. What for me has been most significant about this incident is the dog that refused to bark. Modi has an ego the size of that alleged blimp, but strangely, when Gautam directly took him on, not a yip. Makes me wonder why; makes me wonder if there is a realization that you can put yourself over and above the game, push players just so far, before it boomerangs on you. I hope so, anyway.

Nice observation about Modi, no?

[thevortex]

Well, it is rare for me to find that any 'expert' agrees with my take on things. So its a refreshing change. :)

[Temujin Khaghan]

Mandira Bedi on (Extraaa innings) why Uthappa is playing well - You know he has been working very hard in the gym and all that and there is something not everyone knows - he prays a lot. Yes, he is a very good Christian. ------------ now thats the kind of crap we are getting on TV. the usual bottom of intelligence-chain characters like Mandira Bedi who think mentioning that Uthappa is a good Christian is a very insightful remark to make in a pre-match analysis show just like she sees in one of the countless Bollywood chat shows. -------------- someone like gambhir makes a honest statement and everyone has a problem with it.

[teacup]

Mandira Bedi on (Extraaa innings) why Uthappa is playing well - You know he has been working very hard in the gym and all that and there is something not everyone knows - he prays a lot. Yes, he is a very good Christian. ------------ now thats the kind of crap we are getting on TV. the usual bottom of intelligence-chain characters like Mandira Bedi who think mentioning that Uthappa is a good Christian is a very insightful remark to make in a pre-match analysis show just like she sees in one of the countless Bollywood chat shows. -------------- someone like gambhir makes a honest statement and everyone has a problem with it.

The last time I checked Mandira Bedi did not have any history of playing cricket and is on TV only as an eye candy. Can't say the same about Gambhir though. By the way, going from one extreme to another is not the desirable solution either.

[Temujin Khaghan]

The last time I checked Mandira Bedi did not have any history of playing cricket and is on TV only as an eye candy. Can't say the same about Gambhir though. By the way' date=' going from one extreme to another is not the desirable solution either.[/quote'] What extreme? Mandira is pretty stupid - no arguments there. But if cricket players cannot say whats on their mind then everthing would become such dull tripe. if gambhir had said that he was playing against royals just for practise then that should be insulting... like wasim akram said about india in the wc match in 99 Gambhir said that Royals werent really right up there enuf to scare DD and there is nothing wrong about that.

[teacup]

What extreme? Mandira is pretty stupid - no arguments there. But if cricket players cannot say whats on their mind then everthing would become such dull tripe. if gambhir had said that he was playing against royals just for practise then that should be insulting... like wasim akram said about india in the wc match in 99 Gambhir said that Royals werent really right up there enuf to scare DD and there is nothing wrong about that.

He could have conveyed the same message sans insulting words like "ordinary". Instead of saying, "except for Yusuf the other players were ordinary" he could have said, "RR had fielded a young and inexperienced side and were not a real threat to us". You don't have to be a diplomat to get one sentence in English right and Gambhir is not exactly a mug in that language. He chose to be arrogant and lacked a sense of history or perspective when commenting about his opponent. Nobody is against cricketers speaking their mind but at the same time it is not too much to expect some class while they are at it.

[vvvslaxman]

Next someone is going to tell James Hopes "You look ordinary" :cantstop:

[zen]

Too much is being made about what people speak, give them a break. I would hope that cricketers be more diplomatic (esp when they are representing their country) but no big deal if they are not I am a RR fan and yes, we are ordinary. But I won't be surprised if we make it to the semis, beat DD/MI in it and then take out the fav (whoever it is) in the final. Being ordinary doesn't mean you can't play extraordinary cricket :P

[someone]

Too much is being made about what people speak, give them a break. I would hope that cricketers be more diplomatic (esp when they are representing their country) but no big deal if they are not I am a RR fan and yes, we are ordinary. But I won't be surprised if we make it to the semis, beat DD/MI in it and then take out the fav (whoever it is) in the final. Being ordinary doesn't mean you can't play extraordinary cricket :P

Hello, it is about respect and more important timing. It is stupid to say that to a team who you have just beaten. Probably check the RR is ordinary thread in IPL 3 forum, there is a heated discussion about this with most people disagreeing with GG.

[zen]

Hello, it is about respect and more important timing. It is stupid to say that to a team who you have just beaten. Probably check the RR is ordinary thread in IPL 3 forum, there is a heated discussion about this with most people disagreeing with GG.

I know what it is about. As I said, it's not a big deal for me If most people disagree with GG, does it mean I have to do that too? I don't post by gauging where the majority is going!

[someone]

I know what it is about. As I said, it's not a big deal for me If most people disagree with GG, does it mean I have to do that too? I don't post by gauging where the majority is going!

As I have mentioned in that thread, the logic is flawed, people here say GG has the right to say his honest opinion about RR but if we change the context and someone mentions that about India, it suddenly becomes a big deal. There have been many aussies and other players whom have given their honest opinion about India, but what I have seen is people start fuming and take it deeply as sign of disrepect but when GG who is a indian player himself says it, it is alright. He futhermore says it after a match, he did not have the guts to say that b4 and furthermore defending his stupidity.

[zen]

As I have mentioned in that thread, the logic is flawed, people here say GG has the right to say his honest opinion about RR but if we change the context and someone mentions that about India, it suddenly becomes a big deal. There have been many aussies and other players whom have given their honest opinion about India, but what I have seen is people start fuming and take it deeply as sign of disrepect but when GG who is a indian player himself says it, it is alright. He futhermore says it after a match, he did not have the guts to say that b4 and furthermore defending his stupidity.

Well, supporting freedom of speech and supporting the contents of the speech are two different things. I am supporting freedom of speech here. By saying that I won't be surprised if an ordinary side like RR plays extraordinary cricket to get in to semis and then even win it says that despite looking ordinary, RR shouldn't be taken lightly You have to learn to understand what's being implied. Unnecessary spoon feeding is a waste of time Again before trying to imply that Indians don't respect if criticism is targeted towards them you have to understand whether that 'lack of respect' is shown towards the content of the opinion or the right to air ones' opinion :winky: