Re: Trying to work out what the core thing is - some unthought through thoughts

by furriner Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:30 pm

horace wrote:
lardbucket wrote:In breaking news, Makita have come on board to replace Qantas.

They want the world to see their tools; and they've found the perfect display environment.

Gold ... With a massive diamond inset.

Seconded.

by furriner Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:32 pm

And I don't even know wtf is a "Makita".

by Nath Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:35 pm

furriner wrote:And I don't even know wtf is a "Makita".

they make power tools

by furriner Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:46 pm

^^ Cheers Nath.

by JGK Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:54 pm

Nath wrote:
furriner wrote:And I don't even know wtf is a "Makita".

they make power tools

Mr and Mrs Warner?

by Fred Nerk Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:09 pm

Except that the tools that Makita make are useful and have a specific purpose....

by tricycle Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:33 pm

furriner wrote:Meanwhile two great Test series are almost completely sidelined from the news.

And the stupidity of the world cup qualifiers too

by PeterCS Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:26 pm

furriner wrote:Great series of posts above, including the OP.

Of course we all like to troll Aussies, they're perfect targets most of the time.

But it just makes me sick reading the possible range of punishments for your players - as described by lardie and horrie. It's horrific. One year to life time bans? Trevor C level of disgrace? Come on guys, that's not on.

CA should cut down on sledging, 'head butting the line', and related nonsense.

But FFS stop making this an operatic examination of Australian ethics.

Treat your guys with some humanity and in particular I am almost sure Warner needs to be given more consideration- as of the publicly available information out there now, IMO he's being lynched.

As Horrie might say: remarkable opposite-of-a-bake.

Justice can be such a hard thing to get exactly right - and to get seen to be right, the extra dimension.

Should there be mitigation for Warner because he's no Einstein, or for Smith because he just about immediately owned up (even if in a naive belief it'd then be a little slap on the wrist)? Or for Bancroft, because he was just the stooge who did the deed, but was just following orders? (ugly historical echoes there, though)

I don't really know the ideal outcome. It pains me if the Aus public gets into full crucifixion mode - or a burn the traitors at the stake mentality - because I prefer ethics to be ethics and not religion.

And also because I've seen way too much disembodied punitive religiosity in the last five years generally - with Scotland and then even worse, Brexit and Trump.

But what is harsher than just (harsher than in other countries?), what is too harsh, not harsh enough.

Maybe they should manufacture tamper-proof balls, just in case .....

by lardbucket Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:28 pm

I’ve got a word for them.

Scrapegoats.

by PeterCS Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:30 pm

furriner wrote:And I don't even know wtf is a "Makita".

It's a brand of highly effective unisex vibrators, produced in an insalubrious Tokyo suburb, Furri.

by lardbucket Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:32 pm

PeterCS wrote:
furriner wrote:And I don't even know wtf is a "Makita".

It's a brand of highly effective unisex vibrators, produced in an insalubrious Tokyo suburb, Furri.

... Invented by a man named Green?

by PeterCS Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:43 pm

No doubt. Or Greene. "Your Third Man" ...

by Red Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:45 pm

Interesting that throughout the whole series, public opinion has been running against Warner. In both the more erudite, and the tabloid rag, letter-writers have unanimously condemned his actions.

I was at the cricket on Boxing Day and many in the crowd were disappointed he was reprieved on 99. His robust celebrations immediately upon reaching the ton met with disapproval for their arrogant and ostentatious nature.

Warner like a few others is a polarising figure, and it's interesting to see how many Aussie fans have suggested that our team is receiving its comeuppance.

Despite our public liking winners, there has been a bit of disquiet for some time about behavioural issues and triumphalism surrounding the cricketers that besmirch our sporting character.

With that in mind, the public outcry is not surprising, but perhaps there has been a bit of hysteria and sense of loss of proportion at times. Certainly some have noted that our obnoxious politicians escape this sort of collective scrutiny and outrage.

Maybe removing the toxic force who leavens our conduct with dark deeds will help win over sections of the public who openly support the opposition. There is a lot of schadenfreude atm.

by taipan Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:48 pm

Red wrote:Interesting that throughout the whole series, public opinion has been running against Warner. In both the more erudite, and the tabloid rag, letter-writers have unanimously condemned his actions.

I was at the cricket on Boxing Day and many in the crowd were disappointed he was reprieved on 99. His robust celebrations immediately upon reaching the ton met with disapproval for their arrogant and ostentatious nature.

Warner like a few others is a polarising figure, and it's interesting to see how many Aussie fans have suggested that our team is receiving its comeuppance.

Despite our public liking winners, there has been a bit of disquiet for some time about behavioural issues and triumphalism surrounding the cricketers that besmirch our sporting character.

With that in mind, the public outcry is not surprising, but perhaps there has been a bit of hysteria and sense of loss of proportion at times. Certainly some have noted that our obnoxious politicians escape this sort of collective scrutiny and outrage.

Maybe removing the toxic force who leavens our conduct with dark deeds will help win over sections of the public who openly support the opposition. There is a lot of schadenfreude atm.

How is Warner polarizing? I thought everyone hated him.

by JGK Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:53 pm

taipan wrote:
Red wrote:Interesting that throughout the whole series, public opinion has been running against Warner. In both the more erudite, and the tabloid rag, letter-writers have unanimously condemned his actions.

I was at the cricket on Boxing Day and many in the crowd were disappointed he was reprieved on 99. His robust celebrations immediately upon reaching the ton met with disapproval for their arrogant and ostentatious nature.

Warner like a few others is a polarising figure, and it's interesting to see how many Aussie fans have suggested that our team is receiving its comeuppance.

Despite our public liking winners, there has been a bit of disquiet for some time about behavioural issues and triumphalism surrounding the cricketers that besmirch our sporting character.

With that in mind, the public outcry is not surprising, but perhaps there has been a bit of hysteria and sense of loss of proportion at times. Certainly some have noted that our obnoxious politicians escape this sort of collective scrutiny and outrage.

Maybe removing the toxic force who leavens our conduct with dark deeds will help win over sections of the public who openly support the opposition. There is a lot of schadenfreude atm.

How is Warner polarizing? I thought everyone hated him.

Not Mark Nicholas.

by skully Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:57 pm

He re-invented batting - and premeditated Aussie cheating.

by taipan Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:58 pm

JGK wrote:
taipan wrote:
Red wrote:Interesting that throughout the whole series, public opinion has been running against Warner. In both the more erudite, and the tabloid rag, letter-writers have unanimously condemned his actions.

I was at the cricket on Boxing Day and many in the crowd were disappointed he was reprieved on 99. His robust celebrations immediately upon reaching the ton met with disapproval for their arrogant and ostentatious nature.

Warner like a few others is a polarising figure, and it's interesting to see how many Aussie fans have suggested that our team is receiving its comeuppance.

Despite our public liking winners, there has been a bit of disquiet for some time about behavioural issues and triumphalism surrounding the cricketers that besmirch our sporting character.

With that in mind, the public outcry is not surprising, but perhaps there has been a bit of hysteria and sense of loss of proportion at times. Certainly some have noted that our obnoxious politicians escape this sort of collective scrutiny and outrage.

Maybe removing the toxic force who leavens our conduct with dark deeds will help win over sections of the public who openly support the opposition. There is a lot of schadenfreude atm.

How is Warner polarizing? I thought everyone hated him.

Not Mark Nicholas.

But is Mark Nicholas actually a functioning human entity?

by JGK Thu Mar 29, 2018 12:04 am

taipan wrote:
JGK wrote:
taipan wrote:
Red wrote:Interesting that throughout the whole series, public opinion has been running against Warner. In both the more erudite, and the tabloid rag, letter-writers have unanimously condemned his actions.

I was at the cricket on Boxing Day and many in the crowd were disappointed he was reprieved on 99. His robust celebrations immediately upon reaching the ton met with disapproval for their arrogant and ostentatious nature.

Warner like a few others is a polarising figure, and it's interesting to see how many Aussie fans have suggested that our team is receiving its comeuppance.

Despite our public liking winners, there has been a bit of disquiet for some time about behavioural issues and triumphalism surrounding the cricketers that besmirch our sporting character.

With that in mind, the public outcry is not surprising, but perhaps there has been a bit of hysteria and sense of loss of proportion at times. Certainly some have noted that our obnoxious politicians escape this sort of collective scrutiny and outrage.

Maybe removing the toxic force who leavens our conduct with dark deeds will help win over sections of the public who openly support the opposition. There is a lot of schadenfreude atm.

How is Warner polarizing? I thought everyone hated him.

Not Mark Nicholas.

But is Mark Nicholas actually a functioning human entity?

You make a good point.

by Lindsay no.2 Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:18 am

lardbucket wrote:LN2:

Your average Australian fan has grown (through experience) to expect some players from other nations to cheat, and to squirm and lie afterwards until they are wrist-slapped or even pardoned by the ICC, whether that cheating is at Sarfraz Nawaz, Michael Atherton, Wasim and Waqar, Hansie Cronje, Rahul Dravid, team mint policy, or Mohammed Amir level.

If someone from their own team cheats, though, the public clearly expect CA to penalise that player heavily, more heavily than the pissweak ICC. They also 'write off' that cheating player off for life. Trevor Chappell, who gave an interesting view the other night, and whose life has been ruined by one act, whose marriage broke down, and who hasn't spoken to his brother in over ten years, is an example of this. He hasn't moved for 35+ years without someone calling him out on that one delivery. What he said, and I believe it, is that Australian society will punish Warner and Smith more severely than either the ICC or even CA. Bancroft's career and perhaps life have also been ruined. At the end of the day it's the totally unforgiving Australian public, not the players or the board, who believe that the phrase 'it's not cricket' still means something, that our cricketers must never cheat, and if/when they do, they will pay for it with their honour if not their lives. Smith, Warner are the true Hollow Men, they and Bancroft will never play for Australia again.

You see this collective unforgiving national response as sanctimonious ... but the reality is that Australians have an almost religious attachment to cricket and the idea of fair play. Yes the Australian fan will squeal and point fingers accusingly when players from other nations cheat, but he has no expectation that those players will be punished by their boards or public. If one of their own cheats, though, that player is as good as dead ... to select these players again would be akin to John Hewson entering THAT election with the dead cat of GST hanging around his neck, while previously loyal voters ran screaming for the exits. Within 24 hours of this recent event, 89% of the polled Australian public wanted Smith gone, banned for life. No pissweak ICC sanction was ever going to suffice.

Perhaps Smith's actions and the evolving results might be summarised by the old motto ... if you can't be a good example, you can at least serve as a warning for others. If CA does hand out severe penalties now, and it looks like 12-month bans at a bare minimum for all 3 involved (longer for Warner) the pressure will be on ICC and other boards to act more appropriately if other players are 'caught out' in future.

Thanks for the above lard - I found that informative and illuminating in equal measure. And a lot of what you have written has come to fruition in the last 24 hrs so you would also appear to be something of a savant.

It's an interesting moral construct for the Aussie cricket fan then (no, perhaps widen that to cricket fans of every nationality). If a transgression is made then the transgressor should expect the full force of disgust and ire to come down on them. But who decides what determines transgression or cheating? At what point in history did not walking when you know you nicked it become acceptable - and when the first ever Aussie didn't walk when he nicked it, when everybody knew he had was he villified as a cheating bastard? Or appealing for a catch when you know it's hit the ground - I vaguely recall Greg Ritchie doing that. Did he get crucified for that or was that deemed to be naughty but not criminal? Where's the line these days?

For me the thing that's most heinous in this isn't the ball tampering it's the fact that a junior was co-opted by the senior player(s). As an Aussie fan that would be the thing that would anger me the most. Imagine being Bancroft. Warner puts you on the spot, you're trying to secure a place in the team (the ambition you've had since you were a kid, the potential glory and riches it brings). To say no risks being cast adrift within the group by the senior player (kind of like the stereotypical cop movie where good cop refuses to take bribes and is blackballed by his 'dirty' colleagues) and surely leads to ultimately getting dropped very quickly, never to be seen again. Talk about Hobson's choice.

by taipan Fri Mar 30, 2018 5:15 am

Hansie Cronje's life ban was hardly a wrist slap. Amir got five years. Azharuddin and others also got life though later commuted.It is a bit disingenuous to suggest other countries have never come down hard on players.

And as Trike suggested earlier this week, the Warne/Waugh/JtB situation has never been fully explained to my satisfaction.

by taipan Fri Mar 30, 2018 5:40 am

Banned players list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cricketers_banned_for_corruption

by ojitarian Fri Mar 30, 2018 7:23 am

taipan wrote:Banned players list.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cricketers_banned_for_corruption

I never realised there was a T20 competition in SA called the "Ram Slam". holy-sheep

Would have thought it was more appropriate for NZ.

by lardbucket Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:53 am

taipan wrote:Hansie Cronje's life ban was hardly a wrist slap. Amir got five years. Azharuddin and others also got life though later commuted.It is a bit disingenuous to suggest other countries have never come down hard on players..

For ball tampering?

You’re having a lend.

by horace Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:32 am

Clearly Redgel is in full rectal splatter mode. You have to feel for his servants.

by lardbucket Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:14 pm

Your right, taips is serious. Can't see the difference between match fixing or spot fixing for corrupt payment and ball tampering, but wants the use of mints or a zipper as a tampering tool to be massively different to tampering using a scrap of sandpaper.

And I see Faf has weighed in now in the same vein, holier than ever ...

I've given Faf some latitude in the past, but the evidence is in, he really is just a qunt. Already caught twice and found guilty of ball-tampering twice (scraping the ball on his zipper, polishing it with mints), his best bowler has been caught and sanctioned once for picking at the seam, and he's captain of a team that had the ball reverse swinging miles after a mere 18 overs in the last Test. It'd be instructive to challenge him to deny in public that he and his side have not indulged in ball-tampering during this very same series; I wonder if he's got the gall. He's a lying piece of shit. Not only a cheat, but a lying amnestic cheat. Just slink off and die. We'll punish our own appropriately for descending into the sewer, but don't you think for a second that you've escaped from it.

by Sponsored content