veer Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 We already had divided people on SG.. now we forming SRT and RD camps eh?? Frankly, I am tired of all three of them.. now I am just waiting on them to retire so we can move on.. good that they are not playin 20/20.. lets move forward..
Holysmoke Posted July 24, 2007 Author Posted July 24, 2007 The sulking bit is from the OP you have posted....which you asked me to read properly before posting. Why sulk?Is he a kid? Why can't he let the BCCI know that he doesn't agree with Dravid and that he would like to play.What is stopping him from doing that instead of "not talking"?Is he scared that the BCCI will tell him the same . Why sulk? Are you serious? Who the hell wouldnt be angry if someone else decides their stuff for them. What are you talking. Ofcourse he was angry at dravid for deciding about his career, his life. He has all the right in the world to sulk. I told you earlier, why he didnt let the bcci and world know he doesnt agree with dravid. Do we need another controversy? It was blackmail for tendulkar. Either agree with dravid, and opt out..even when you want to play.. and probably would have done a good job.. OR.. create a media circus.. and destroy your legacy..
coffee_rules Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 Total BS..All these reports are unsubstantiated and quite the way the Indian media works these days. I will never believe any of these reports unless SRT himself comes out in a press conference firing RD on his role in the seniors' decision. If you believe these reports are true, then you are the market that the media is catering to.
beetle Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 Why sulk? Are you serious? Who the hell wouldnt be angry if someone else decides their stuff for them. What are you talking. Ofcourse he was angry at dravid for deciding about his career' date=' his life. He has all the right in the world to sulk. I told you earlier, why he didnt let the bcci and world know he doesnt agree with dravid. Do we need another controversy? It was blackmail for tendulkar. Either agree with dravid, and opt out..even when you want to play.. and probably would have done a good job.. OR.. create a media circus.. and destroy your legacy..[/quote'] How do you know Dravid decided it for him? Why would he do that? Does he not know the power of sachin tendulkar's words in the media? If sachin hasn't spoken about this to anyone then how do you know this?If you are ready to believe the media on this then why not believe the earlier version that Dravid was told to inform them.And seriously ...do you think his telling the BCCI that he wants to play would create less controversy than" not talking" to the skipper does.Don't you think it is a much mature approach to just inform the BCCI Why doesn't he do that ? what is he scared of ?Is it possible that Dravid is being used as a punching bag ? Is it not just possible that Dravid was told about the decision to leave the seniors and was given the responsibilty to soften the blow?(or maybe the BCCI had more sinister designs?)and Dravid just got caught in between.Maybe someone in the BCCI is trying to mislead tendulkar into believing what he believes .Why doesn't he ask the BCCI. Seriously ....do you believe Dravid would take such a decision without consulting them...i.e. if they had the option of of deciding to play or not.
Holysmoke Posted July 24, 2007 Author Posted July 24, 2007 I dont. As I said earlier, my arguments are with the hypotheses that these news are true..just like my earlier arguments were based on the fact that the earlier reports were true. Thats exactly what i am saying.. why is dravid acting like a middleman.. and acting as a punching bag...
beetle Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 May be he was trying to be decent.Letting them know from a team mate than the board or the media.If the news is correct ...then even he was told to opt out.That couldn't have been an easy thing for a captain to hear. And what does he gain by being the middleman here? You are assuming that he did it to keep his captaincy(from your earlier post)....I would rather believe he did it in good faith because he is essentially a good guy unless someones proves otherwise.
Bumper Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 The BCCI scumbags are to blame. Dont they have the spine to communicate decisions that involve players to the players directly ? Why would they use a middleman ? This dude Vengsarkar is pathetic. Fearing backlash from his home association & the media, he's passing the buck to Dravid.
beetle Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 Agree....vengsarkar was already facing a backlash from the home association for not backing Tendulkar during the "resting " drama.
talksport Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 To start with this is typical English press Bakwaas.....They learnt a trick or two from their aussie colleagues to disrupt the team spirit..... From what I can see with my naked eyes following from the tour matches in Chelmsford and Lords ....the team spirit is absolutely fine and eager to play good cricket...The results will soon come.
Gambit Posted July 24, 2007 Posted July 24, 2007 I won't be surprised if Tendu was moaning and biatching given his 194* press conference boohoo.
Chandan Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 I simply cannot believe that some of you are beliving this rubbish! But forced out or opted out, it was best possible decision that could have been taken, both for the Indian team as well as the three batsmen in question!!
beetle Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 I won't be surprised if Tendu was moaning and biatching given his 194* press conference boohoo. :whatchutalkingabout:omg_smile::whatchutalkingabout:omg_smile: Aaj suraj kahan se nikla......???:tounge_smile:
Holysmoke Posted July 25, 2007 Author Posted July 25, 2007 But forced out or opted out, it was best possible decision that could have been taken, both for the Indian team as well as the three batsmen in question!!Not really. This is a world cup we are talking about. We can build for the future after the world cup. Im sure SRT wouldve done a better job at 20-20 than Venugopal Rao, or Jaffer, or Kaif.
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 World cup or not 20-20 is a joke. I prefer it is kept that way.
yoda Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 World cup or not 20-20 is a joke. I prefer it is kept that way. It is not. It is the only format where there is a chance for the game to be completed in a sane amount of time.
Holysmoke Posted July 25, 2007 Author Posted July 25, 2007 World cup or not 20-20 is a joke. I prefer it is kept that way.No, its not. I can bet that in 10 years time, we'll be playing more 20-20's than tests.
The Outsider Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 It is not. It is the only format where there is a chance for the game to be completed in a sane amount of time. I think Gambit's proposed 5/5 is a better idea.
yoda Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 I think Gambit's proposed 5/5 is a better idea. i said sane, not in the shortest amount of time. 8 hours or 6 hours x 5 days are insane.
Predator_05 Posted July 25, 2007 Posted July 25, 2007 Twenty20 will replace the 50 over game sometime in the next decade. My feeling is that World Cup 2011 will be the last ever 50 over ODI tournament. Twenty20's popularity will have reached it's zenith by then, and the ICC will scrap the ODI format altogether.
Holysmoke Posted July 25, 2007 Author Posted July 25, 2007 yea.. looks like it.. frankly.. i would rather watch a 3 hr 20-20 game as compared to watching a test match for 3 hrs
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