hopeforthebest wrote:Dave Richardson the ICC CEO has been put between a rock and a hard place as the BCCI ask him to appeal the Anderson verdict. If he refuses his job at risk, if agrees his job is at less risk. Good luck to him.
SaintPowelly wrote:Probably time to leave this now, a verdict has been reached ( rightly or wrongly ), the players involved will move on, so should we.
ddb wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:Probably time to leave this now, a verdict has been reached ( rightly or wrongly ), the players involved will move on, so should we.
We can come back to this once the BCCI push through an appeal. Let's talk about cricket!
Aidan11 wrote:ddb wrote:SaintPowelly wrote:Probably time to leave this now, a verdict has been reached ( rightly or wrongly ), the players involved will move on, so should we.
We can come back to this once the BCCI push through an appeal. Let's talk about cricket!
Agreed.
Arthur Crabtree wrote:In the Guardian, they are saying India are expressing their lack of faith in decision, but recognise they have no right to appeal.
D/L wrote:shankycricket wrote:Important to know the nature of Jadeja's "aggression" here. Did he push Anderson, as alleged by Stokes? If thats the case, both of them should have been banned. If his "aggression" was only to stare back at Anderson angrily, as Dhoni seemed to be suggesting, then of course Anderson is the primary guilty here. The fact that various English players and their board have offered various versions of this story whereas Dhoni has remained consistent is probably a pointer as to who the more credible party is. Any road up, it is astonishing that a player can openly admit to pushing another player and get away with it, whether provoked or unprovoked, there should be no place for physical contact in cricket. Even if he hadn't pushed Jadeja, the fact that he managed to get away without even a fine for the swear words that he used is a disgrace. How Jadeja responded to that is irrelevant, no one is saying he's entirely innocent or that he shouldn't be punished. One can only pity the deluded souls who think an Indian player would've gotten away with this. Kohli was fined in Australia on the last tour for showing a finger to the crowd....
Yet more speculation as to what may have happened. It seems that Kohli was rightly fined. Pity should be reserved for people who cannot see both sides of a story.
D/L wrote:Red Devil wrote:Exactly. Aus also had the option of putting some of their players up to state that a) nothing had happened, followed by b) counter claiming that it was really root who was the aggressor and then c) levelling charges against Root. However, Aus had a little more integrity and acted appropriately.
Following D/L's logic - any player that is defended by his team did nothing wrong and anyone not defended was guilty - very warped as it would then also mean that Suarez did nothing wrong since his whole country supported him!
Eng management are still insisting that they don't want Anderson to change his behaviour because there's nothing wrong with it - even though Anderson himself has admitted his behavior is against the spirit of the cricket. That doesn't show he's innocent, it shows the warped moral compass of the Eng set-up.
If the Aussies thought there were any mitigating circumstances, they would have used them in Warner's defence.
There is no illogicality in that unlike, in your attempt to follow logic, your conclusion that I believed that the existence, or not, of a defence, determines whether someone is innocent or guilty. If you follow logic, try to follow it properly and not get diverted into la-la land.
The Indian set-up, of course, has a perfect moral compass.
Dilbert wrote:D/L wrote:shankycricket wrote:Important to know the nature of Jadeja's "aggression" here. Did he push Anderson, as alleged by Stokes? If thats the case, both of them should have been banned. If his "aggression" was only to stare back at Anderson angrily, as Dhoni seemed to be suggesting, then of course Anderson is the primary guilty here. The fact that various English players and their board have offered various versions of this story whereas Dhoni has remained consistent is probably a pointer as to who the more credible party is. Any road up, it is astonishing that a player can openly admit to pushing another player and get away with it, whether provoked or unprovoked, there should be no place for physical contact in cricket. Even if he hadn't pushed Jadeja, the fact that he managed to get away without even a fine for the swear words that he used is a disgrace. How Jadeja responded to that is irrelevant, no one is saying he's entirely innocent or that he shouldn't be punished. One can only pity the deluded souls who think an Indian player would've gotten away with this. Kohli was fined in Australia on the last tour for showing a finger to the crowd....
Yet more speculation as to what may have happened. It seems that Kohli was rightly fined. Pity should be reserved for people who cannot see both sides of a story.D/L wrote:Red Devil wrote:Exactly. Aus also had the option of putting some of their players up to state that a) nothing had happened, followed by b) counter claiming that it was really root who was the aggressor and then c) levelling charges against Root. However, Aus had a little more integrity and acted appropriately.
Following D/L's logic - any player that is defended by his team did nothing wrong and anyone not defended was guilty - very warped as it would then also mean that Suarez did nothing wrong since his whole country supported him!
Eng management are still insisting that they don't want Anderson to change his behaviour because there's nothing wrong with it - even though Anderson himself has admitted his behavior is against the spirit of the cricket. That doesn't show he's innocent, it shows the warped moral compass of the Eng set-up.
If the Aussies thought there were any mitigating circumstances, they would have used them in Warner's defence.
There is no illogicality in that unlike, in your attempt to follow logic, your conclusion that I believed that the existence, or not, of a defence, determines whether someone is innocent or guilty. If you follow logic, try to follow it properly and not get diverted into la-la land.
The Indian set-up, of course, has a perfect moral compass.
Interesting to see that the first part was speculation whereas in the second situation becomes a “fact”. Talk about comprehending ones own thoughts.
Dilbert wrote:So the point that Anderson should have been fined or ECB should have taken action on him based on his own admission that he swore and pushed is speculation?
Dilbert wrote:And your assumption that Aussies didnt think there were any mitigating circumstances when they easily could have done what Eng did - get team mates to lie, accuse Root of instigating etc. isnt speculation?...
Return to International Cricket
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests