India's Defeat is of Their Own Making

[kabira]

Bossbhai Let Mods Do Their Work. Warning For You Too.

[Dhondy]

Dhondy et al. show me one incident in the history of cricket where the umpire takes a decision after consulting the fielding captain.:hysterical: If you think it happens all the time, you guys watch a different game.:hysterical:

Never defended that. However, wasn't this discussed before the tour? Didn't Kumble agree with Ponting before the Tests that the captain's word in these matters would be accepted? If so, what's the point in griping about it now?

[The Outsider]

All - QUIT ALL NON CRICKET RELATED DISCUSSION IN THIS AND OTHER THREADS IMMEDIATELY.

[The Outsider]

Never defended that. However, wasn't this discussed before the tour? Didn't Kumble agree with Ponting before the Tests that the captain's word in these matters would be accepted? If so, what's the point in griping about it now?

That doesn't change the rules. It was a verbal agreement and if the batsman in question, Ganguly, stood his ground the umpires were obliged to follow the rules rather than the verbal agreement between Kumble and Ponting.

[observer1]

Gentlemen This thread has the potential for intelligent discussion. Can we delete interpersonal abuse, or, for the sake of those people who surface once a month (between fistfights I presume), move prepubescent replies to 'chit chat' or 'bash bash' so that they can continue these slugfests there.

thanks

[Dhondy]

That doesn't change the rules. It was a verbal agreement and if the batsman in question' date=' Ganguly, stood his ground the umpires were obliged to follow the rules rather than the verbal agreement between Kumble and Ponting.[/quote'] I am sorry, that wasn't in the pre-series agreement. It's the umpire's prerogative whether he seeks arbitration from the 3rd official or not. And clearly, a situation such as this wouldn't arise unless the batsman stood his ground.

[chunky_lafanga]

Dhondy are you trying to be a bigger attention seeker than me? :hysterical:

[kilroy]

Which umpire dare give a marginal decision against them? Do you buck the odds when you are unsure at work, or do you take the safe option? Ask yourself.

are u saying it's right for an umpire to rule 50-50 decision in favor of australia? and that we are stupid if we hope for half of those go our way? mind you, umpires are there to make the right decision, not 2 c whoz the more dominant side and rule decisions in their favor. the reason why everyone's mad is coz 90% of the bad decisions have gone against india. it's fine if 1 or 2 go against u, but 10 decisions ??!?!

[jf1gp_1]

Check Post # 30

i cant defend what someone else wrote. all i can do is agree or disagree with the authors view point.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Chandan]

I'm willing to answer each point that Doc has raised, in case he is here to discuss.

[DesiChap]

The agreement was between the teams. Ganguly stood his ground. Benson had to go to the sq leg ump and upstars not ask Ricky the cheat

[The Outsider]

I am sorry, that wasn't in the pre-series agreement. It's the umpire's prerogative whether he seeks arbitration from the 3rd official or not. And clearly, a situation such as this wouldn't arise unless the batsman stood his ground.

The fact is that Ganguly stood his ground and in that case Benson's rulebook was to consult Bucknor or go to third umpire, not ask the fielding captain whether it was out or not.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[aruvind21]

Yup, I know I won't be on many people's Christmas list next year, but what the hell, as if I care! There are several uncomfortable questions to be asked. Firstly us, the fans- do we hold ourselves to the same standards that we demand from umpires, players...other fans? How many of you were jumping up and down when Sreesanth was not given out despite being plumb to Monty in the Lords Test last year? Who knows what would have happened had England won that Test match? As it is, the decision allowed India to hold out for a draw, and England never recovered. Sangakkara got a similar decision in the recent series against Australia. At that point anything was possible. SL might have pulled off a series levelling win had Sanga been allowed to stay, an event that would have been as momentous as, say, the Aussies winning 16 in a row. Funny, I didn't see calls for all of us to write in to the ICC then? Or is it because it was only SL? Does anybody remember the decision against Kasper that sealed the 2005 Ashes? His hand was off the bat, yet he was given out in a schoolboy umpiring error, a decision that cost the Aussies a proud record they had held for two decades. Did I hear a cacophony of protests on this board? Calls for boycott of future tours? Now, when umpiring errors have gone against us, we are aggrieved, are we? We all knew Bucknor's record coming into this match. Why didn't we protest against his exclusion then? It's not as if we didn't know that he'd screw us...he's done it every time he's had the chance in the last 10 years, starting from that negated run out against Cullinan in SA to the 2004 Sydney Test. Why did we then wait till he had another opportunity to finger us? By raising a threnody of wailing now, we come across as nothing but a bunch of losers, who seek to degrade the opposition's moment of glory to make ourselves feel better. OTOH, had we voiced our reservations officially before the match, given what has followed, we could have turned back to the ICC and lambasted them for not paying heed to our concerns. Opportunity lost. But that's not all. It's amazing to see that Australian cricketers are being branded as cheats because they appealed for a bump catch, stood their ground after nicking the ball, or claimed a deflection off the pad as a catch. Right, so we have never resorted to these kind of tactics before, eh? Off the top of my head, I can remember at least two occasions when Ganguly claimed a bump catch in recent series, and several occasions when nicks from Indian batsmen went unnoticed while they stood their ground. Don't recall the integrity of our players being questioned then? The point is, international cricket is a high stakes, winner-takes-all contest. There are million dollar deals up for grabs. Players are under pressure to perform, and know that the difference between a successful career and penury could be a line as thin as being given a second chance at the crease. Under the circumstances, it's naive to expect them to be honest or forthright. Joh jeeta, wohi sikander. May I suggest that India wouldn't have landed in this situation, but for their ham-handed decision making? Their steadfast reliance on a failed opening pair, championing of a mediocre spin bowler because of his record against one particular batsman, the selectorial idiocy of flogging the fast bowlers to death in inconsequential ODIs, and their board's supreme avarice in leaving the side with no preparation time before a vitally important series, were all follies that deserved to be punished, and duly have been. Finally, it would be prudent to recognize that you make your own luck. And the way you do that is by winning. The more you win, the more gilded your reputation becomes, and umpires suconsciously make a note of your success. It's a situation the Aussies find themselves in by ruthlessly decimating all before them over the last decade or so. Which umpire dare give a marginal decision against them? Do you buck the odds when you are unsure at work, or do you take the safe option? Ask yourself. India had the chance to win convincingly against England and Pakistan and come into this series with a burgeoning reputation on the back of 2-0 victories against major opposition, and as the unequivocal second placed side, a record that would have given the umpires something to think about. On both occasions, they chose the safety first approach to preserve what they had. That conservative approach is now coming home to roost. Must say that we are one of the worst bunch of fans at taking defeat. I don't recall a match where we have introspected and looked inwards to address our own deficiencies to the exclusion of extraneous influences. It's always the umpires, the conditions, or the conniving opposition. We are shamelessly opportunistic and practitioners of double and triple atandards. I can only hope that the blokes who represent us out in the middle don't think like us.

Dude those were matter of 1 or decisions but now here 11 decisions have gone wrong . There is a lot of difference between 1:11. if 1 wrong decsion u consider bad then what 11 wrong decsions is more than worse.

[Bumper]

Bad timing, Dhondy. Your points are taken. But we cannot let this kinda blatant nonsense go unquestioned, can we ? Look at how umpiring has reduced this game to a farce. From a position of strength, we were pushed to the backfoot in the first innings. Our batsmen then crawl their way back. And in the 2nd innings, what looked like a certain draw has been reduced to a heart breaking loss. Could we have still saved the game ? Yes. Were the Aussie bowlers & fielders great in pushing for victory ? May be. But could the Aussies have done it without Ms Bucknor or Benson ? No one denies that umpiring decisions have gone for us in some cases, sometime in the past. But do you agree that Bucknor's attitude towards our team is sickening ? This moron has something against us. If we do not let this go unchallenged, what is the point in being the richest board on earth ? And what about Mark Benson ? The guy goes upstairs promptly when Bhajji is 2 foot inside the crease (when taking a quick run), while ruling Ganguly out caught (without checking with the 3rd ump) in one of the most silliest of umpiring mistakes. Have never seen two such clowns conspiring to screw us in the same match. I can take a defeat that came with some bad decisions, a' la BG trophy 2004. If you recall, even in that series, Aussies got a fair bit umpiring decisions going their way. But nothing as farcical as this. The umpiring in this game, is as close to 'blatant bias' you will ever see.

[Bumper]

CC & Boss, please lay off each other. CC, debate the OP, dont bring in some other convo into this thread.

[aruvind21]

New rules have been brought into the Sydney Test 1. One player in host team will be having two chances to play. 2. Umpire decsion is not final he has to consult the Ricky to give out. To be brought soon If umpire shows wrong decision, a player can show this :finger: to him.

[Bumper]

Gentlemen, if you are interested. You can catch the latest developments on CNN IBN Live: http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/streaming-260.html