People responsible for the SCG farce

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Anakin]

Shame on us!!!!

[ludhianvi]

-edit- new topic created :)

[sm332]

simple man ... he belongs to a generation of white boot lickers who emigrated out of India and are still stuck in a time warp .... no pt being goody two shoes with arseholes like this Oz team

[Lurker]

You are making a big mistake here. Those that support umpires and are not too keen on technology are also the first to wish that umpiring is of top standard. You somehow mean to suggest that only those who worry about technology worry about fair decision. No. In the end the argument is always about fair decisions, and most of the folks who advocate human touch in the middle do it because of their faith, or lack thereof, in technology and how correct it is. You have to understand that line of logic before you go about chastising - Where are those yada yada.

[Anakin]

You are making a big mistake here. Those that support umpires and are not too keen on technology are also the first to wish that umpiring is of top standard. You somehow mean to suggest that only those who worry about technology worry about fair decision. No. In the end the argument is always about fair decisions, and most of the folks who advocate human touch in the middle do it because of their faith, or lack thereof, in technology and how correct it is. You have to understand that line of logic before you go about chastising - Where are those yada yada.

And you are making another big mistake too. Those that wish that umpiring is of top standard should wake up and check the quality of umpiring now first.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

No such thing as top standard umpiring .... Not a day goes by in Test cricket without someone getting hacked .... unless ofcourse people have the moral fortitude to call a spade-a-spade ... and not hide behind the usual peurile cliche's

That is the way you see your world in most ways, it is not only cricket where you think only certain people have the moral fortitude to call a spade a spade. It is NOT!. The people who argue about umpires here are also the most vulnerable to criticism. In this hi-tech era when every decision is scrutinized by 10 angles you need a lot of moral fortitude to stand behind the umpires, atleast the good ones. Where you go completely wrong is that you suppose the supporters of umpires are actually supporting decision made by Bucknor that spared Symonds! Clearly that is baloney. That said it definitely looks like this game would have a certain impact on the role of umpires. Is that for good or bad we shall have to wait and see but for the time being it would be only fair to respect those who have a different viewpoint on the subject and not go lunatic on them. xxx

[Anakin]

If you don't support the quality of umpiring of B&B then speak up for technology or at least about the umpiring quality, rather than repeating the same cra.p. Specially when the best umpire right now, Taufel, has been making serious mistakes too.

[Lurker]

If you don't support the quality of umpiring of B&B then speak up for technology or at least about the umpiring quality' date= rather than repeating the same cra.p. Specially when the best umpire right now, Taufel, has been making serious mistakes too.

Weird logic. To criticize Bucknor and Benson is NOT the same as using technology. You seem to have limited answer on this one. Its either 100% error free umpiring or technology. Let me tell you thats not the case. And yes I would be open to technology if it can be made fool proof. However as of now it is not and thats the reason many posters support the traditional umpiring. But to ignore that viewpoint and to blame fans for what happened at SCG is ridiculous. xxx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Anakin]

Not weird at all, probably missed the OR, you don't have to support technology, but at least speak up against the quality of umpiring. The problem with you guys is that you'll defend the quality of umpiring while mentioning some cra.p like it doesn't happen everyday or whatever, which is not true either.

[Lurker]

Technology clearly and squarely shows up the culprits time and again .... there is just no reason why I should tolerate the opposing viewpoint when its clear that viewpoint is not grounded on fairness or level playing field... heck no one has ever pointed out a passage of play involving Thugs Inc., that Iam told time and again is quite charming. If you are one of those lets start from Day 5 Sydney and go backwards.

If you can't tolerant an opposing viewpoint you need to get some help. And no I dont use that word lightly. I am all for human umpiring but I am also open when it comes to criticism and use of technology, like your posts. But for you it seems to be a one track road where everyone has to jump on the technology bandwagon. That is clearly a thuggery in itself. I have mentioned this before and I say this again, those that support human umpiring are also the ones who want umpiring to be at its highest. You have to understand and realize that instead of thinking they are some people who lack moral fortitude and keep sweeping issues under carpet. This is more to do with your atitide of taking a different viewpoint rather than the issue in itself. xxxx

[Lurker]

Not weird at all' date=' probably missed the OR, [b']you don't have to support technology, but at least speak up against the quality of umpiring. The problem with you guys is that you'll defend the quality of umpiring while mentioning some cra.p like it doesn't happen everyday or whatever, which is not true either.

So where have you seen people not criticizing the umpiring?? If you can find me one poster, and I mean ONE poster, who has supported the umpiring at SCG I would concede your point. Every single post that I have seen clearly mentions umpiring was cr@p. It is merely your paranoia that you fail to see that.

[Anakin]

So where have you seen people not criticizing the umpiring?? If you can find me one poster' date=' and I mean ONE poster, who has supported the umpiring at SCG I would concede your point. Every single post that I have seen clearly mentions umpiring was cr@p. It is merely your paranoia that you fail to see that.[/quote'] See there exactly is the problem. Umpiring was horribly bad in this match, but it hasn't been all that good either if you consider all matches in the last few years. So what's your solution to that? You have to at least admit that fact first, but I'm sure you won't and pull out some cliches defending umpiring "standard".

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

I gave the reasons for that ..... what next someone here will talk about nuking of India(ohh wait) does that mean I have to tolerate them ? No. So it boils down to how reasonable your viewpoint is ? Right now I see absolutely no fact based case that defends those viewpoints .....

No reason why you have to give Nuking India example. You sure you talking to the right person? As for your judging how "reasonable" the other viewpoint is, what exactly does that mean? That you are willing to be proved wrong? And when was the last time that happened? We have both been around here long enough to realize NEVER. And even if for a second I did make an effort to change your mind, what happens if I dont? Does that give you a right to open posts taking a shot on people with different viewpoint? And if so why would I waste a few minutes on you then?

and my point is this : Given the nature of Cricket the things that can transpire the complex rules and such there is no way a Human being can guarantee a accurate decision let alone a unbiased one ... ball-after-ball session after session. If you think otherwise can I see some evidence ?

I dont quite see why. Your question is based on a simple case of YOU seeing it that way. Maybe because YOU can not concentrate that long enough? Let me ask you this - Say an umpire is not able to concentrate in an entire day of Test, about 90 odd overs - 550 deliveries. What about a 20/20 game. A match with half that number of overs with enough breaks in between. Do you want to use umpire there as well? Or do you want technology? xxx

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Lurker]

Forget about proving wrong ... pehle evidence tau samne lao ... saala 4 saal hogaya me breaking my head on this topic ... Havent seen anyone produce any sort of evidence other than emotions and the usual old-skool cliches.

Havent debated with you for 4 years on this but I do remember debating on this atleast 2 times with you. You had your viewpoints, I had mine. At the end we were both unconvinced, fair enough. But just as I, or others, dont go around opening a thread everytime Hawkeye seems to get it wrong, with comments like - People resposible for Technology etc - I fail to see why you should go nuts about it too.

Dont know what T20 has got to do with Test cricket but yeah obviously the chances for a umpire to screw up are far lesser in T20 as compared to Testmatches simply because of the duration.

So let me get this straight then. You want technlogy in Test cricket and have no issues with T20. Is that how you see it? Two set of rules for the same game? xxx