Ganguly - Warne at it again

IPL organisers won't mind the publicity

MACCA wrote:Ganguly way out of line

phurt - it's a case of leopards & spots with both of them.

At least Warne has faster SMS skills.

Good to see two old warhorses still getting underneath each other's skin after all these years....

rofl - scoreboard

Henry wrote:Good to see two old warhorses still getting underneath each other's skin after all these years....

Jeez, I first read 'whores' for 'warhorses'.

Would still be correct. Or even correct-er.

@furri

Warney sooking. I guess playing with Ponting for so many years was bound to have some side-effects.

Actually to my knowledge Ponting has not sooked about Ganguly. In fact they get along quite well. It was Steve Waugh who was sooking about Gangles.

Not specifically about Ganguly, but Ponting sooks, he sooks big time.

If only you two could have been so level headed after the Sydney test . . .

Ganguly apparently wasn't entitled to ask the third umpire for a ruling on disputed catches but did so because of his influence and had it overturned even though the umpire officiating thought it was a clean catch and video evidence tended to suggested that. Ganguly also was involved in time-wasting. I recall on their last tour to SA when he was due to bat it took him 8 minutes to appear. Taufel implored the players not to appeal in the spirit of cricket because technically he should have been ruled out.

Both Ganguly and Warne are as bad as one another.

And if Smith's claimed a catch that wasn't clean, he should receive a penalty.

Red wrote:Ganguly apparently wasn't entitled to ask the third umpire for a ruling on disputed catches but did so because of his influence and had it overturned even though the umpire officiating thought it was a clean catch and video evidence tended to suggested that. Ganguly also was involved in time-wasting. I recall on their last tour to SA when he was due to bat it took him 8 minutes to appear. Taufel implored the players not to appeal in the spirit of cricket because technically he should have been ruled out.

Both Ganguly and Warne are as bad as one another.

And if Smith's claimed a catch that wasn't clean, he should receive a penalty.

Why, Red? Was Ganguly penalized for doing so? Was Dhoni penalized for doing so? How do you prove he didn't think it was fair?

Head out of arse, pull, Red.

Red wrote:

And if Smith's claimed a catch that wasn't clean, he should receive a penalty.

By which you infer Smith cheated.
I didn't see the incident, but if Smith claimed claimed the catch, the umpire agreed that it was clean
and Gingang saw no reason (as he claimed) to persuade the onfield Ump to consult the third, then what's the problem?

Warne, Ganguly, Smith... huge sooks, absolutely huge - I certainly wouldn't be trying to claim 'victory' for one of them.

Actually, I've seen the replays (that presumably the 3rd umpire would've also seen) and how he ruled that Ganguly was not out has got me farked. It looked a clear catch.

But it's all a bit *meh*.

skully wrote:Actually, I've seen the replays (that presumably the 3rd umpire would've also seen) and how he ruled that Ganguly was not out has got me farked. It looked a clear catch.

But it's all a bit *meh*.

Well you can't upset Ganguly who's a big favourite of the Indians. One sad by-product of this though is that whenever a NOT OUT comes on the big screen the crowd at the match assumed the player who claimed the catch has 'cheated'.

Ganguly is a pompous cheat. Nothing new here.

It was quite clearly out.

Ganguly - the new WG?

Red wrote:

skully wrote:Actually, I've seen the replays (that presumably the 3rd umpire would've also seen) and how he ruled that Ganguly was not out has got me farked. It looked a clear catch.

But it's all a bit *meh*.

Well you can't upset Ganguly who's a big favourite of the Indians. One sad by-product of this though is that whenever a NOT OUT comes on the big screen the crowd at the match assumed the player who claimed the catch has 'cheated'.

So tell us how Smith should be punished, red . . .

tac wrote:

Red wrote:

skully wrote:Actually, I've seen the replays (that presumably the 3rd umpire would've also seen) and how he ruled that Ganguly was not out has got me farked. It looked a clear catch.

But it's all a bit *meh*.

Well you can't upset Ganguly who's a big favourite of the Indians. One sad by-product of this though is that whenever a NOT OUT comes on the big screen the crowd at the match assumed the player who claimed the catch has 'cheated'.

So tell us how Smith should be punished, red . . .

He should spend more time in Ganguly's company?

Punishment for both thataway.

Or a holiday in Greece with Gangers?

tac wrote:

Red wrote:

skully wrote:Actually, I've seen the replays (that presumably the 3rd umpire would've also seen) and how he ruled that Ganguly was not out has got me farked. It looked a clear catch.

But it's all a bit *meh*.

Well you can't upset Ganguly who's a big favourite of the Indians. One sad by-product of this though is that whenever a NOT OUT comes on the big screen the crowd at the match assumed the player who claimed the catch has 'cheated'.

So tell us how Smith should be punished, red . . .

Sent to play for Zimbabwe.