Is the ICC finally getting off its arse about Zimbabwe?

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

Zat wrote:

The One wrote:yes, a doc saying smoking and stress could prove fatal for you is clearly a threat. put him in jail

Stay out of it. You've already shown your capacity for rational thought and cogent argument elsewhere.

i'm sorry darling, am i interrupting an aussie twat-fest?

Now he is coming onto to you.

did i just see a band-wagon?

Speaketh the man who jumped in to support Vikas

Nice

Forum gold.

Batman wrote:

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

Zat wrote:

The One wrote:yes, a doc saying smoking and stress could prove fatal for you is clearly a threat. put him in jail

Stay out of it. You've already shown your capacity for rational thought and cogent argument elsewhere.

i'm sorry darling, am i interrupting an aussie twat-fest?

Now he is coming onto to you.

did i just see a band-wagon?

Speaketh the man who jumped in to support Vikas

Nice

TBH Nigel it's not like you are keeping out either.....

So, at least I am not twatting on about bandwagons.

Its rather strange that most forummers from whichever country are actually quite scathing of the BCCI in this issue.

We have over 30 pages in the other thread and there are only a couple of people willing to Defend the BCCI's actions.

What is also very amusing is that these defenders of the BCCI, seem to be completely happy that $11million of cricketing funds get given to the ZCU and none of it gets into cricket there.

They are alo quite happy to accpet that financial regularities unearthed by a neutral large global auditing firm were never released at the vote of India.

And yet they still call themselves fans of cricket. No offense but any cricket fan would not condone cricketing funds being spent or thrown away in that magnitude to fund or provide a security blanket for any regime!!

holcs wrote:Its rather strange that most forummers from whichever country are actually quite scathing of the BCCI in this issue.

We have over 30 pages in the other thread and there are only a couple of people willing to Defend the BCCI's actions.

What is also very amusing is that these defenders of the BCCI, seem to be completely happy that $11million of cricketing funds get given to the ZCU and none of it gets into cricket there.

They are alo quite happy to accpet that financial regularities unearthed by a neutral large global auditing firm were never released at the vote of India.

And yet they still call themselves fans of cricket. No offense but any cricket fan would not condone cricketing funds being spent or thrown away in that magnitude to fund or provide a security blanket for any regime!!

Charlie, there you go again using logic.

Batman wrote:

I already put my views on that second Zat thread and it isn't approving of BCCI either ways. Fact is nothing would please me more than seeing Pawar, Modi, Shah dead and BCCI buried.

So WTF are you all up in arms about yet more threads on the matter??

The more air space given this issue the better.
It's a serious issue - yet it seems you are defending it just for the sake of ... well, errr ... defending it!

Perhaps your efforts are better spent in emailing the BCCI - if a million or so Indian fans did so by following their conscience,
then who knows, the corrupt pr!cks who run your cricket in India might get the message.

Too much to ask I guess .... all for the sake of ONE f**king vote.
Nice message to send the rest of the world!!

On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Said the pot.

taipan wrote:

holcs wrote:Its rather strange that most forummers from whichever country are actually quite scathing of the BCCI in this issue.

We have over 30 pages in the other thread and there are only a couple of people willing to Defend the BCCI's actions.

What is also very amusing is that these defenders of the BCCI, seem to be completely happy that $11million of cricketing funds get given to the ZCU and none of it gets into cricket there.

They are alo quite happy to accpet that financial regularities unearthed by a neutral large global auditing firm were never released at the vote of India.

And yet they still call themselves fans of cricket. No offense but any cricket fan would not condone cricketing funds being spent or thrown away in that magnitude to fund or provide a security blanket for any regime!!

Charlie, there you go again using logic.

I am a crusader (wathch this word get used out of context), to try an enlighten cricket fans, that this situation is not good for the game!! I know know other way - except where Bell, Moores and Miller are concerned!!!

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Harsh, most on here - do not like the BCCI's stance on this!!

F*cks sake. Yeah, this decision is shit. Yeah, whoever has condoned the BCCI's actions are most-likely being one-eyes who just can't bear to hear a word against their country.

But you ladies need to calm down and wind your necks in.

holcs wrote:They are alo quite happy to accpet that financial regularities unearthed by a neutral large global auditing firm were never released at the vote of India.

the votes must be distributed by population in the icc. i always thought it was one member one vote

Danny, I don't take kindly to anyone suggesting my opinions may be 'fatal'.

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Oh the irony, the irony. It's like a blind man calling another person blind.
Keep bringing it on oh great knight.....

Henry wrote:

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Said the pot.

PMSL.

PS ; Helluva generalisation zimmer!

holcs wrote:

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Harsh, most on here - do not like the BCCI's stance on this!!

They must be keeping quiet about it.

Merlin wrote:

Henry wrote:

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Said the pot.

PMSL.

PS ; Helluva generalisation zimmer!

So should an Indian treat it as an abuse and just report it?

Invader Zim wrote:

holcs wrote:

Invader Zim wrote:On the whole Indian 'fans' are a bunch of childish insular wankers. I'm sure there are exceptions, but they don't seem to post on cricket forums.

Harsh, most on here - do not like the BCCI's stance on this!!

They must be keeping quiet about it.

Yeah, we know your innards are sound proof, so?

So should an Indian treat it as an abuse and just report it?

Go ahead, ya banal wanker.

The One wrote:

holcs wrote:They are alo quite happy to accpet that financial regularities unearthed by a neutral large global auditing firm were never released at the vote of India.

the votes must be distributed by population in the icc. i always thought it was one member one vote

And you know as it is well documented TO, that whatever the BCCI vote for, so do ZIM, PAK, BANG, SL, WINDIES - that makes 6 votes = majority.

Its all to do with money. If your ignorant enough to think otherwise well, you really do not have much of an idea!

Why would India want to make sure that irregularities were not shown? Maybe because they would lose a vote?

Thats just spiffing for world cricket isn't it!!

Batman wrote:

So should an Indian treat it as an abuse and just report it?

Well it's neither treat nor threat - so I shouldn't bother mate!
It's a vast generalisation which won't prove fatal to anyone!

Zat wrote:Danny, I don't take kindly to anyone suggesting my opinions may be 'fatal'.

If you know the general tone of posts on here, you'd realise that it was clearly not a threat but a satirical remark on the BCCI/the effect such 'obsession' might have on your health. Atleast, that's what I would think if that remark was directed at me. But I'm not too much into .

Careful merls, Vikas is just looking for a chance to defend himself.

Might be worth editing that last of yours.

HH_pink wrote:

Zat wrote:Danny, I don't take kindly to anyone suggesting my opinions may be 'fatal'.

If you know the general tone of posts on here, you'd realise that it was clearly not a threat but a satirical remark on the BCCI/the effect such 'obsession' might have on your health. Atleast, that's what I would think if that remark was directed at me. But I'm not too much into .

Meh, I took it how I took it, and still think it was sufficiently provocative that someone unstable might decide to try and take it literally.

Some things are OK to joke about, some aren't.

And the forum's so-called stand-up comic should know the diference.

Zat wrote:Danny, I don't take kindly to anyone suggesting my opinions may be 'fatal'.

Zat, you thought that as much as a genuine threat as someone threatening you with candy floss. FFS, you know this place isn't an episode of Columbo. Get a grip. You just wanted to kick something off.

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

taipan wrote:

The One wrote:

Zat wrote:

The One wrote:yes, a doc saying smoking and stress could prove fatal for you is clearly a threat. put him in jail

Stay out of it. You've already shown your capacity for rational thought and cogent argument elsewhere.

i'm sorry darling, am i interrupting an aussie twat-fest?

Now he is coming onto to you.

did i just see a band-wagon?

Speaketh the man who jumped in to support Vikas

Nice

ah yes, i jumped on to a bandwagon of...wait, there was no one else on the wagon