This is one of the stupidest reviews I have ever read. As already mentioned in many of the replies I dont under what this guy is whining about. Unfortunately the rain started and we couldnt have a match. But i completely agree with the last point though, especially because th cricket bodies are rich enough to do this.
RE:Agree with the last point only
by Mehmood on Feb 08, 2007 11:17 PM
I agree with the fact that they are all Bastards, illiterate and corrupt people who want to make money on every single chance for their own pockets...Weather forecast rain weeks in advance...so why the match her !!!
RE:Agree with the last point only
by satish ojha on Feb 08, 2007 10:09 PM
and i feel you are the stupidest on board.so stop flaunting your great english and think about common man.and if you do not know what politics is simply keep your mouth shut,as simple as this.
RE:RE:Agree with the last point only
by Anil Mishra on Feb 08, 2007 11:10 PM
Great reply Satish, such comments should be replied in the same way you did!
I think nowhere else but in India the spectators are treated so poorly. No shade for the spectators, no refund in case of rain, caged in like animals at a zoo. In India spectators are treated like milch cows who are there to be milked of all their hard-earned money. Also I do feel it may be a divine retribution, last time in Kolkata most of the spectators actually supported SA and booed Indians, just imagine the uproar if some muslims had supported Pakistanis against India
RE:poor spectators
by yogesh soni on Feb 08, 2007 09:48 PM
dude chennai crowd applauded pakistani team after their test victory over India. and that was in very good spirit. If kolkata crown booed india that was becoz india played pathetic and lost by 10 wickets..y shud crowd not support SA if they are playing excellent cricket ? pls do not bring patriotism and religion into sports
RE:RE:poor spectators
by Anirban Gomes on Feb 08, 2007 10:19 PM
Yogesh bhai, There were more SA flags in the stadium than Indian flags .. because the flags started selling outside the stadium well before the match even started. Your logic of India playing badly is not right my friend. You are just trying to make a wrong thing right, maybe LEFT in this case :-)
RE:RE:RE:poor spectators
by rohit on Feb 08, 2007 11:04 PM
wht about the bangalore crowd which booed its own captain DADA.. jus because that timid and shy dravid had chances to lead...
RE:RE:RE:RE:poor spectators
by yogesh soni on Feb 09, 2007 02:21 AM
what abt them ?? do u expect a billion indians all behaving in exact same manner so as to justify that they are patriots ??
prem,when I first read this article I wanted not to write any comment. do u know why? bcoz I really started hating u after reading some disjusting analysis on some players particularly sachin.
but then I thought that some of the points mentioned here are valid and so I shud write the response.
of course the decision to shift venue due to political reason is not ok. but then how can u blame Mr. Powar. he is first a politician and then BCCI chief. and u r expecting a non-political behaviour from a politician that is wrong. politician never care abt countrymen, they just care abt money. so how can powar care abt spectators. expecting this is sheer nonsense
again it is not the spectators that shud be taken care of. BCCI shud care abt players too. At a number of instances I have seen matches going on in hot summer of JUNE and JULY, when a normal ppl might not even dare to go out of home in open sun. and players play at temparature of around 45 degree centigrade. it is just unbelievable. don't u think bcci shud take care abt it also.
RE:there are others concerns also
by Ahmed Ali on Feb 08, 2007 09:41 PM
Do you want the players to play cricket in air-conditioned room. Are they showered with crores of rupee just for this??
RE:RE:there are others concerns also
by yogesh soni on Feb 08, 2007 09:45 PM
yaa man, think abt soldiers who are situated in places like siachen and are paid only a few thousand rs (monthly). And they have to stay there for months. while cricketrs have to bear it for only a few days. And ofcourse the players shud have more stamina than normal ppl :) in any case they themselves chose their career. They could have chosen to become Embedded Systems Design ENgineer like me :)
RE:RE:RE:there are others concerns also
by Ahmed Ali on Feb 08, 2007 09:47 PM
Hahahaha......you make the right point, Yogesh. They chose their career, and no one would mind earning a lakh in a day to stand in sun for 3-1/2 hours (that is one inning rest of the time they take rest in the pavilion).
u think it is possible to change venue at 2 days notice with the weather forecast. How about a month of preparation that a stadium has to undertake to host an international match. and also how about the tickets that are sold out a month in advance. r u suggesting that venue be changed and tickets for new venue be sold in 2 days, or to fly 100000 spectators from kolkata to pune ?? regarding the unfairness of a 25 over game, u r not the first one to realize this. That is why duckworth-lewis system is in place, to give higher target to the team batting second. And over a period of time D/L system has been proven to be fair enough. Of course you are two dumb to understand all this. It was a bullshit article, just to accuse the politicians. If you do care enough for people why don't you run for the post of BCCI president next time around as you are self proclaimed cricket expert.
RE:idiot prem panicker
by Prem Panicker on Feb 09, 2007 11:03 AM
Trouble is, you guys read something and think, how can I contradict that? Who said anything about a month of preparation? The CAB had 11 days -- it was told it would be hosting this game exactly two weeks ago. You think no weather forecasts were available? And since you bring up the point -- if a stadium needs a month of preparation to host an international contest, why give the game to a stadium with less than half that time available. Calling me an idiot is the easy bit, and that you do very well. Thinking is a touch harder, so I don't blame you if you didn't.
The way the the match being shifted from pune to calcutta and Junta being made to wait in agony just to make money shows how corrupt the system it.
Shard Pawar Sir...Play these DIRTY games in politics only. Indian cricket is already seeing it bad times owing to Players bad perfocmances, dont Worsen the situation.
RE:Really Pathetic
by yogesh soni on Feb 08, 2007 09:34 PM
I do not think organisers made any extra money in asking spectators to wait. Infact they were trying to give them out value for their money just in case there was a match possible. In any case, it is not the organises, but the Umpires who decide to call off a game. Spectors were free to leave if they wanted to.
RE:RE:Really Pathetic
by radheshyam jha on Feb 08, 2007 09:45 PM
Yogesh Bhai!! Fully agree with you.
People woud definitely have Left. And so did many who knew it well that match could Never started, specially when it rained so hard and ground literally a swimming pool. I dont understand what made them take a Call at 8:30 and not at 6 or may be earlier??
I guess these decisions are Infuceced by the Local Managament and not taken only by umpires.
I am just intereted in common man's money.Can someone recall of instances where the amount has been refunded in such situations??
its most unproffessional from the so called worlds richest sport body. its a known feauture that indians are worst in management and administration. its proved time and again. god save poor spectators
Had the match been reduced to 25 overs a side, the team batting second would have to score according to the Duck worth & lewis Method and the chasing total would have been much more than what Sri Lanka made.
So your line: "What kind of contest would that have been? Sri Lanka batted with 50 overs in mind; after playing 18.3 overs, were you going to tell them they had only 6.3 overs to go" does not makes much sense.
You need to work on your cricket knowledge. This generally happens in cricket-affected matches. At least those 25 overs would have brought some firecrackers out and the crowd would have got some value for its money.
RE:Rain affected message
by Prem Panicker on Feb 09, 2007 11:09 AM
Oh wow. Thanks for the lesson. A little addition: The Duckworth Lewis system is predicated on the final score the team batting first makes. SL had already batted 18.2 overs on the presumption it was going to bat the full 50 (to put it even more simply, not the way it would have batted if it had known from the outset that it was going to bat only 25). Whatever target SL set, that is it -- DL comes in only if there is rain AFTER the first innings ends. Does it make sense now?!
RE:RE:Rain affected message
by Ahmed Ali on Feb 09, 2007 03:09 PM
Mr Panicker,
Thank you for looking at the comments. Please note that D/L method does comes into the picture even before the end of the first innings. This is mentioned on the ICC's official web site and also on Cricinfos detailed FAQ. If you are still not satisfied do a Google for D/L Method and you can go through the results.
Heres the link for cricinfo's FAQ: http://www.cricinfo.com/link_to_database/ABOUT_CRICKET/RAIN_RULES/DL_FAQ.html
Read point No.5:
5. But why should the target score sometimes go down if there is an interruption in the first innings and teams have the same number of overs?
In interruptions to the first innings the D/L method makes appropriate allowance for the comparative resources lost by the stoppage.
Consider the following situation. Suppose Team 1 started well in the style of the renowned Sri Lankan 1996 World Cup winning team but the wheels fell off and they were 150/9 in 30 of the 50 overs. On average Team 1 would be all out shortly, leaving Team 2 to score at the rate of around 3 per over for their full 50 overs. If rain interrupted play at this point and 19 overs were lost per side, then on the resumption Team 1 would have only one over to survive and their run rate would then be close to 5 per over. By all the 'old' methods, for 31 overs also, Team 2 would have to score around 150, around 5 per over, to win - in other words Team 1 would have been greatly advantaged by the rain interruption changing a required scoring rate of 3 per over to 5 per over for Team 2. By the D/L method this advantage to Team 1 would be neutralised so that the target for Team 2 would be well below 150 in this circumstance, and fairly so, which maintains the advantage Team 2 had earned before the stoppage. In other words, and quite logically, Team 2 have to get fewer runs than Team 1 scored to win in the same number of overs.
This truely is a shameful moment for the BCCI who have made this utter blunder.It is really disheartening to see the inefficiency of these guys in deciding venues.Dont they look into the monsoon period of various cities & plan their match venues??? This is the second attrocious event after the Chennai one day wash out in 2006. Wake Up BCCI, its time to pull up your socks & raise to world standards :-(
