What the bloody hell is happening?

[THX_1138]

So i was gone for a month and the proverbial shyte hits the fan! Allegations of hypocrisy and cheating are more rampant than hair on my head. I think we need to ease up with the allegations, reflect on the sources we use to support our arguments (people quoting avenues that are otherwise periodically discredited). Having said this, consider the lack of outcry when dhoni claimed pietersen's catch. I am not an apologist (prempting the inevitable accusation) but if you consider that it is often tedious to tell if a catch has been taken cleanly or not, and the pre match aggreement between kumble and ponting, the umpires cannot be held responsible for ponting's inability to distinctly tell if the catch was taken cleanly. The only accusation of any merit here are the stumpings of symonds that hurt india a lot, but apart from that mark benson has been quite decent, ponting his usual dick self, and bucknor a blind eyed bat. In summary, lets tone down the rhetoric, we have been bucknored before. hell tendulkar has over his career been dismissed by either being caught, bowled, lbwed, runout or bucknored. We are Indians... we cant handle this. We are better than this.

[Guest BossBhai]

-- Removed on request of the user --

[THX_1138]

Pietersen was called back .... dada wasnt. Ergo diff rules for diff people. Hence the fan covered with fertilizer.

dude... pietersen was called back since the replays showed that the catch was not on. pietersen was not called back by the indians, he was directed to stay on the field by the teammates from the pavilion who were watching the replay, and more importantly, the umpire had yet to give his decision either ways. the matter is not that we cheated then, the point is that an aggreement was arrived at and at times one has to bite the hard bullet if the other party in the aggreement takes it upon one's self to abuse the aggreement, though quite possibly the abuse might not have been intentional. if dhoni could not have known decisively if the catch was clean, is it not unfair to claim that ponting could have been just as ambivalent?

[Anakin]

Did Dhoni take the catch and then fell on the ground like Ponting? If it was like Clarke's catch, it's understandable, not always easy to tell if it bounced before they took it, that's why I didn't criticize Clarke. But what Ponting did was plain cheating, add that to the fact that he didn't walk (again i don't mind) and he ruled SCG out without even being sure of the catch, but what is even more worse is the hypocrisy when he claims integrity.

[The Outsider]

Having said this, consider the lack of outcry when dhoni claimed pietersen's catch. I am not an apologist (prempting the inevitable accusation) but if you consider that it is often tedious to tell if a catch has been taken cleanly or not, and the pre match aggreement between kumble and ponting, the umpires cannot be held responsible for ponting's inability to distinctly tell if the catch was taken cleanly.

That was an agreement between the two captains and had nothing to do with the umpires. The umpires were still obliged to follow the rulebook and once Ponting claimed and grassed catch and Ganguly stood his ground it pretty much meant that the agreement had been thrown in the dustbin and the umpires had to make a ruling based on the rules not on the fielding captain's word.

The only accusation of any merit here are the stumpings of symonds that hurt india a lot, but apart from that mark benson has been quite decent, ponting his usual dick self, and bucknor a blind eyed bat. In summary, lets tone down the rhetoric, we have been bucknored before. hell tendulkar has over his career been dismissed by either being caught, bowled, lbwed, runout or bucknored. We are Indians... we cant handle this. We are better than this.

Benson, decent? He probably gave more wrong decisions than Bucknor in the match.

[Dinx - the Jinx]

dude... pietersen was called back since the replays showed that the catch was not on. pietersen was not called back by the indians, he was directed to stay on the field by the teammates from the pavilion who were watching the replay, and more importantly, the umpire had yet to give his decision either ways. the matter is not that we cheated then, the point is that an aggreement was arrived at and at times one has to bite the hard bullet if the other party in the aggreement takes it upon one's self to abuse the aggreement, though quite possibly the abuse might not have been intentional. if dhoni could not have known decisively if the catch was clean, is it not unfair to claim that ponting could have been just as ambivalent?

if pieterson was called back after the replays showed that the catch was not clean, why dint benson call SG back when the replays were not conclusive.. why did he gowith ponting's words, who has already tarnished his image by claiming a grassed catch as clean??? just like trapping kumble with this stupid agreement, did ponting also lure benson and bucknor into a commercially rewarding agreement? ICC's ACU - pls take note...

[Brainfade]

That was an agreement between the two captains and had nothing to do with the umpires. The umpires were still obliged to follow the rulebook and once Ponting claimed and grassed catch and Ganguly stood his ground it pretty much meant that the agreement had been thrown in the dustbin and the umpires had to make a ruling based on the rules not on the fielding captain's word. Benson, decent? He probably gave more wrong biased decisions than Bucknor in the match.

If not more in number, he certainly gave the most egregious decision of all.