Re: Ponting on ACA

by holcs Mon 07 Jan 2008, 09:54

doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 09:55

skully wrote:An interview with Punter was shown on A Current Affair on Nine tonight. He said Jumbo and he agreed to take the word of the fielder in close to the ground catches. Nothing about walking when you hit it and nothing about not playing in a backyard cricket gentleman-athon. He was surprised at Jumbo's "spirit of the game" remark in the after-match press conference but said Jumbo was entitled to his opinion. He said the Indian management are also entitled to take whatever decision they want regarding the tour future but that it would be disappointing if they cut the tour short. He declined to confirm that the "monkey" word was used but that the Harby issue was a racial matter.

Exactly, and the word of the fielder was accepted. When he found out later that the fielders infact cheated, that's when he made the "spirit of the game" comment.

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 09:56

holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

Two of the six batsmen were.

by lardbucket Mon 07 Jan 2008, 09:57

The fielder (Clarke) didn't cheat, that was a perfectly clean catch.

If you want to see a bump ball and outrageous appeal, look no further than the catch claimed off Warne to complete Harbajhan's hat-trick.

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:00

lardbucket wrote:The fielder (Clarke) didn't cheat, that was a perfectly clean catch.

If you want to see a bump ball and outrageous appeal, look no further than the catch claimed off Warne to complete Harbajhan's hat-trick.

Yes he did cheat. That dropped before him and he ground it after rolling over.

I think Dhoni had a clear bump ball appealed in this match by Gilchrist, Ponting and co. as well.

by holcs Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:00

doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

Two of the six batsmen were.

Thats still leaves you with 8 wickets to bat out say 50 overs! Your clutching at straws and trying to blame someone else for your teams inability to bat out 72 overs to save the game.

Your boys needed to face 12 balls with 3 wickets in hand, and you lost 3 wickets in an over to a part-time spinner. You have no one else to blame other than your own players!!!

by skully Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:03

doremi wrote:
skully wrote:An interview with Punter was shown on A Current Affair on Nine tonight. He said Jumbo and he agreed to take the word of the fielder in close to the ground catches. Nothing about walking when you hit it and nothing about not playing in a backyard cricket gentleman-athon. He was surprised at Jumbo's "spirit of the game" remark in the after-match press conference but said Jumbo was entitled to his opinion. He said the Indian management are also entitled to take whatever decision they want regarding the tour future but that it would be disappointing if they cut the tour short. He declined to confirm that the "monkey" word was used but that the Harby issue was a racial matter.

Exactly, and the word of the fielder was accepted. When he found out later that the fielders infact cheated, that's when he made the "spirit of the game" comment.

Doremi, I thought you were better than this constant line of Aussie fieldsman being cheats. Again, would all this hullabaloo happened if your much vaunted batting line-up survived 72 overs. Only Dravid was sawn off. If Yuvraj hadn't played a poor defensive shot to Roy or Dhoni hadn't have shouldered arms to Roy, we would've all said what a great Test it was and well done to India for surviving, despite some poor calls against them. To concede 6 wickets in one innings to our part timers is the big crime here.

by lardbucket Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:03

doremi wrote:
lardbucket wrote:The fielder (Clarke) didn't cheat, that was a perfectly clean catch.

If you want to see a bump ball and outrageous appeal, look no further than the catch claimed off Warne to complete Harbajhan's hat-trick.

Yes he did cheat. That dropped before him and he ground it after rolling over.

I think Dhoni had a clear bump ball appealed in this match by Gilchrist, Ponting and co. as well.

You're talking about the ball that half-volleyed into the back of Dhon's leg and then ballooned to Gilchrist, wich was shown to be not out on replay but which was initially thought by the players to have gone straight onto the back of the leg, then up to Gilchrist.

Clarke's catch was OUT, it did not hit the ground before he took it. Ganguly should be charged with dissent for lingering AFTER the umpire gave him out.

by skully Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:05

So doremi, you are obviously claiming Ganguly was "cheated". HTF would you have any idea? Because Gangles stood his ground?? FFS. This is the same man that shook his head at an appeal for a bat-pad in Melbourne that hot-spot showed had kissed the face of his bat. Justice was done when Benson gave him lbw anyway.

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:07

holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

Two of the six batsmen were.

Thats still leaves you with 8 wickets to bat out say 50 overs! Your clutching at straws and trying to blame someone else for your teams inability to bat out 72 overs to save the game.

Your boys needed to face 12 balls with 3 wickets in hand, and you lost 3 wickets in an over to a part-time spinner. You have no one else to blame other than your own players!!!

You'd think your two batsmen who were leading the recovery, one of them the best in current form and the other known to be able to play long innings when needed time and again, being sawn off one after the other would hurt your cause.

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:08

skully wrote:So doremi, you are obviously claiming Ganguly was "cheated". HTF would you have any idea? Because Gangles stood his crownd?? FFS.

No, because I saw on TV that the ball didn't carry, and even if it did Clarke ground it after rolling over from the dive.

And yeah, I'd have been pretty miffed even if this was a draw.

by tac Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:08

doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

Two of the six batsmen were.

Thats still leaves you with 8 wickets to bat out say 50 overs! Your clutching at straws and trying to blame someone else for your teams inability to bat out 72 overs to save the game.

Your boys needed to face 12 balls with 3 wickets in hand, and you lost 3 wickets in an over to a part-time spinner. You have no one else to blame other than your own players!!!

You'd think your two batsmen who were leading the recovery, one of them the best in current form and the other known to be able to play long innings when needed time and again, being sawn off one after the other would hurt your cause.

FFS! doremi . . . Ganguly was not sawn off. Ask your father to ****** some sense into you FFS!

by skully Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:10

Doremi, I'm sorry to say you are starting to emit the smell of very sour grapes. You need to be a little more objective. What's your "excuse" for Yuvraj and Dhoni (who was doing it easy with Jumbo before having a brain-explosion).

by holcs Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:12

doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:
holcs wrote:
doremi wrote:ANd how the ****** do you expect the batting line-up to bat the two sessions when they were given out when they were not?

All 10 wickets were dodgy decisions?

Two of the six batsmen were.

Thats still leaves you with 8 wickets to bat out say 50 overs! Your clutching at straws and trying to blame someone else for your teams inability to bat out 72 overs to save the game.

Your boys needed to face 12 balls with 3 wickets in hand, and you lost 3 wickets in an over to a part-time spinner. You have no one else to blame other than your own players!!!

You'd think your two batsmen who were leading the recovery, one of them the best in current form and the other known to be able to play long innings when needed time and again, being sawn off one after the other would hurt your cause.

Dravid's decision was poor,in fact very poor, however that does not withdraw from the fact that you also had, SRT, Laxman, Ganguly (out Fairly IMO), Singh and Dhoni to bat out 72 overs!!! Not a day and a half, just two whole sessions.

And they were inept at doing so. What I think you should be concentrating on, is that Symonds and M Clarke took 6 of your second innings wickets. That if I were an Indian supporter to me wiould be 100 times more inexcusable than the fact that Dravid got a dodgy one!

by skully Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:12

doremi wrote:
skully wrote:So doremi, you are obviously claiming Ganguly was "cheated". HTF would you have any idea? Because Gangles stood his crownd?? FFS.

No, because I saw on TV that the ball didn't carry, and even if it did Clarke ground it after rolling over from the dive.

And yeah, I'd have been pretty miffed even if this was a draw.

You saw what you wanted to see. All the Australian fieldsmen around him immediately responded with jubilation (I await your "yeah but they're cheats" retort). You seem to conveniently forget that Ponting declined a catch in the first innings when he was unsure, even though he caught it (but some part of the ball may have been touching the grass).

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:19

skully wrote:
doremi wrote:
skully wrote:So doremi, you are obviously claiming Ganguly was "cheated". HTF would you have any idea? Because Gangles stood his crownd?? FFS.

No, because I saw on TV that the ball didn't carry, and even if it did Clarke ground it after rolling over from the dive.

And yeah, I'd have been pretty miffed even if this was a draw.
You saw what you wanted to see. All the Australian fieldsmen around him immediately responded with jubilation (I await your "yeah but they're cheats" retort). You seem to conveniently forget that Ponting declined a catch in the first innings when he was unsure, even though he caught it (but some part of the ball may have been touching the grass).

The ball had contact with the ground twice. AFAIK there was no special effects used by the broadcasters.

And the same player claimed one which he grassed later on against Dhoni.

by lardbucket Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:27

doremi wrote:
skully wrote:
doremi wrote:
skully wrote:So doremi, you are obviously claiming Ganguly was "cheated". HTF would you have any idea? Because Gangles stood his crownd?? FFS.

No, because I saw on TV that the ball didn't carry, and even if it did Clarke ground it after rolling over from the dive.

And yeah, I'd have been pretty miffed even if this was a draw.
You saw what you wanted to see. All the Australian fieldsmen around him immediately responded with jubilation (I await your "yeah but they're cheats" retort). You seem to conveniently forget that Ponting declined a catch in the first innings when he was unsure, even though he caught it (but some part of the ball may have been touching the grass).

The ball had contact with the ground twice. AFAIK there was no special effects used by the broadcasters.

We're never going to agree on this. As far as I could tell, there was absolutely nothing wrong with this catch.

The Dhoni glove/pad to Ponting was given not out only because the umpire felt Dhoni had not hit it.

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:29

Whether the umpires gave it out or not-out isn't important here. It's the fact that the catch was claimed when there was an understanding between the two teams that the fielders would be honest about these things.

by lardbucket Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:34

Ponting believed he had caught the ball. I think he had control over it from the moment it lodged in his hand; certainly it was contained totally within his hand throughout the catching attempt. To label him a cheat for this attempt is pretty desperate IMO.

I think Dhoni would have been given out if the umpire had only realised that he HAD hit the ball, that's my point.

by *Buckaroo* Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:37

by holcs Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:39

*Buckaroo* wrote:Zzzz

Thank you for that contribution Bucky!

I see you have no comeback then and have now realised that maybe you need to look closer to home with the blame for the test loss, as opposed to at those sordid biased officials, that from the very first ball had no other plans than to be biased against you!

by doremi Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:42

lardbucket wrote:Ponting believed he had caught the ball. I think he had control over it from the moment it lodged in his hand; certainly it was contained totally within his hand throughout the catching attempt. To label him a cheat for this attempt is pretty desperate IMO.

You always go palm up, or cover the ball with your other hand when you're in control. If you don't, and the ball touches the ground, that's not out.

And you always know if the ball has touched the ground, that's something that atleast I know from personal experience of playing cricket.

by lardbucket Mon 07 Jan 2008, 10:46

Ah, no, actually, you don't ... you can think you've caught it cleanly when you haven't, and sometimes when you catch it cleanly you're not sure. Then you might appeal and ask the umpire what he thinks. Above all, you accept his decision.

by Sponsored content