South Africa reject tri-series proposal

SG wrote:
Yep, had they been touring Australia in '08, this time won't be happening this year for sure.

Again, all you're doing is displaying a massive post-colonial chip on your shoulder. Who cares about that?

You wanted facts. Facts state the FTP had England playing 3 tests and 7 ODIs(not the 4/5 split England wanted) and that they'd finish on the 23rd December and that meant England got to go home for Christmas. That's the facts.

The opinions come in when you start whinging about 'b-b-but w-w-what ab-b-bout i-i-if th-th-they were playing i-i-in Australia, th-this w-w-wouldn't have hap-p-ppened.'

Australia don't usually ignore the FTP and state that they want the dates changed to suit their needs.

I thought you wanted facts? Start dealing in them.

doremi wrote:

Wow, the English have very short memories.

Wow, I think 'the English' corrected him about 5 posts later.

skully wrote:
Ban India.

Fully concur.
And Ban Christmas too - because it upsets the Indians when England don't play them over that period.

all you're doing is displaying a massive post-colonial chip on your shoulder.

Is this your standard reply to all Indians?

Merlin wrote:

skully wrote:
Ban India.

Fully concur.

CA and ECB won't concur though.

SG wrote:

all you're doing is displaying a massive post-colonial chip on your shoulder.

Is this your standard reply to all Indians?

Only the ones on this board.

skully wrote:Well, having digested 17 pages of sturdy and energetic argument and counter-argument, I have come to the following conclusion.
.
.
.
Ban India.

It took you 17 pages?

1. It follows nothing to do with your domestic structure in any way shape or form

Actually it does. Every 'city' team/franchise has a catchment area made up of a specific no. of Ranji teams, and a no of players from that area have to play in every match. And selections are made basically from performances for those teams in ListA and FC.

2. It is owned solely by companies and these companies are in no way related to anything in your domestic structure.

Even though it is owned by companies, they're still under BCCI authority to a great extent, much like our Ranji state associations. So again, quite a bit related to our domestic structure.

Therefore, IPL is domestic cricket.

SG wrote:

all you're doing is displaying a massive post-colonial chip on your shoulder.

Is this your standard reply to all Indians?

No. I tell you what I love though. The fact that you post a tiny, tiny amount of my post. Out of context. Because basically my argument and stancepoint has completely blown you out of the water.

Merlin wrote:Yes Chandan.

Mea culpa.

All your posts here have been meaningless rhetoric without the aid of a single fact, and you still can be condescending? Bravo.

doremi wrote:

Merlin wrote:Yes Chandan.

Mea culpa.

All your posts here have been meaningless rhetoric without the aid of a single fact, and you still can be condescending? Bravo.

Some are even arguing whether IPL is a domestic comp or not. Now thats too much.

The One wrote:

holcs wrote:Example, and I am not getting into this debate is - The forthcoming England Tour.

England wanted one more test match and less ODI's. BCCI refused.

the whole quid pro quo started in 2002. ind played 4 tests in england, eng refused to play 4 in india. ind played 3 tests and 7 odis in england, eng refused to play for the same number of games in india as the poor babies wanted to be home for christmas. so the bcci kept the odis and cut the tests instead of the english request to cut out the odis. if england stayed for another 10-12 days they would have got the 3rd test

Exactly.

India has plenty of grounds and associations which have to be given a game. Cutting ODIs is just not practical, and patently unfair on people who have to wait 2-3 years for a single ODI game.

if england stayed for another 10-12 days they would have got the 3rd test

And avoiding playing 3rd test in the name of Christmas is height of hypocrisy as its a known fact that they don't utter a word when they tour Australia during same period.

SG wrote:

if england stayed for another 10-12 days they would have got the 3rd test

And avoiding playing 3rd test in the name of Christmas is height of hypocrisy as its a known fact that they don't utter a word when they tour Australia during same period.

Australia celebrates christmas though....

Don't you go offending our cultural sensitivities now!

Brass Monkey wrote:

Brass Monkey wrote:

holcs wrote:eng refused to honour that so the requisite number of matches are not there. unless you are ridiculously biased its quite clear its the ecb at fault.

BCCI's main grouse is with the ICC Champions Trophy that is slated for September, without which the board would not have had to trim the itinerary for England's visit.

How is that ECB's fault? The original 'FTP'is quoted that England were supposed to return home before Christmas. They still are. Only India changed the dates of the matches.... therefore it's either BCCI's fault or the ICC's fault.

Go for it.

*sigh*The ICCCT affects England as much as India, and as India had to adjust their itinerary because of an ICC tournament, maybe England should have adjusted themselves as well. Didn't happen, they wanted to go back for Christmas, that's OK, but reducing 2-3 ODIs and virtually depriving 2-3 grounds of the only intl. game they'll get in 2-3 years is not possible.

Brass Monkey wrote:

doremi wrote:

Wow, the English have very short memories.

Wow, I think 'the English' corrected him about 5 posts later.

Phurt, JKL's Scottish.

Don't you go offending our cultural sensitivities now!

Thats not my style.

The ICCCT affects England as much as India, and as India had to adjust their itinerary because of an ICC tournament

FACTS.

2.5%, wasn't it? And Christmas is popular, maybe not to the extent in England and Australia.

And you know, if we started adjusting itineraries for important Indian festivals, taips' posts about BCCI messing with the FTP would actually make sense. So, personally I think it's quite weak from the ECB. I'm in college and I'll be away from home duing the festival season. Hurts, but you grin and bear it.

doremi wrote:

*sigh*The ICCCT affects England as much as India, and as India had to adjust their itinerary because of an ICC tournament, maybe England should have adjusted themselves as well. Didn't happen, they wanted to go back for Christmas, that's OK, but reducing 2-3 ODIs and virtually depriving 2-3 grounds of the only intl. game they'll get in 2-3 years is not possible.

Doremi, tell me different, but the FTP came out. Both knew about the ICCCCCCT. They took that on board. They knew about the dates of the England tour and it's individual matches. Yeah? Then in retrograde India decided it was too much and broke the itinerary agreed with the ICC. They then asked England to shift the goalposts too, which England didn't want. BCCI didn't have to shift the tour dates, but did.

Again SG - you're quite pathetic in picking and choosing which bits you answer to - it's really quite weak of you. Stop feeling hard-done-by regarding Australia and Christmas. The only two teams, to my knowledge, we play over Christmas is Aus and SA - that's pretty damned feasible, considering their cricket seasons and the fact that they both celebrate Christmas.

SG wrote:

Don't you go offending our cultural sensitivities now!

Thats not my style.

Well then you should know that spending Xmas in Oz is different to spending it in a non-christian majority country and stop all the nonsense about them being hypocrites.

More religious tolerance please...

doremi wrote:

1. It follows nothing to do with your domestic structure in any way shape or form

Actually it does. Every 'city' team/franchise has a catchment area made up of a specific no. of Ranji teams, and a no of players from that area have to play in every match. And selections are made basically from performances for those teams in ListA and FC.

2. It is owned solely by companies and these companies are in no way related to anything in your domestic structure.

Even though it is owned by companies, they're still under BCCI authority to a great extent, much like our Ranji state associations. So again, quite a bit related to our domestic structure.

Therefore, IPL is domestic cricket.

As I have conceded at points, if its the direct symantics of a domestic competition you are after, then it is a domestic competition.

Whichever way you loosely try to link it to your current FC structure it is still a non-international competition in my personal opinion.

If you had a challenger T20 or a Ranji T20 then that IMO would be a domestic competition.

To be honest though we're never going to agree.

Brass Monkey wrote:

Doremi, tell me different, but the FTP came out. Both knew about the ICCCCCCT. They took that on board. They knew about the dates of the England tour and it's individual matches. Yeah? Then in retrograde India decided it was too much and broke the itinerary agreed with the ICC. They then asked England to shift the goalposts too, which England didn't want. BCCI didn't have to shift the tour dates, but did.

Quite. But it doesn't fit in the with the Indian forummer message of ' Long live the great BCCI and take that you former colonial pigdogs' does it?

doremi wrote:2.5%, wasn't it? And Christmas is popular, maybe not to the extent in England and Australia.

And you know, if we started adjusting itineraries for important Indian festivals, taips' posts about BCCI messing with the FTP would actually make sense. So, personally I think it's quite weak from the ECB. I'm in college and I'll be away from home duing the festival season. Hurts, but you grin and bear it.

Totally agree it's weak. Still, I think I know exactly what is happening - any slight against the BCCI is a slight against India in yours, SG's, TO's eyes and expect a comment like that to hurt my national pride or something of similar ilk. My issues have always been with the fact you're all trying to blame shift.

The ECB weakly wanted their players to have Christmas off. This was mooted and accepted by the ICC in the FTP, India too concurred this OK. Then they changed their minds and said 'like it or lump it mates, we want to change the dates'.

We lumped it.

JKLever wrote:

Quite. But it doesn't fit in the with the Indian forummer message of ' Long live the great BCCI and take that you former colonial pigdogs' does it?

Nope. And this is what I loathe. They're basically trying for a racial divide - blindly just backing whatever their country's cricket board does. If you transpose the BCCI with the ECB, you wouldn't see me defending much they've done in the past 2 years. It's sickening that people would just fight their corner willy-nilly just because they come from that country.