Re: Re: Re: Re: my msg on 5th jan
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2010 10:45 AM
SK:
Whatever you might say on this forum, Pak "lost" the match - is the experts' verdict. :)
Obviously Pak went out of their way to ensure Hauritz caught that "blinder"... or that Pak conspired with some scientists to give a pair of wings to Haddin to fly to his right to catch Butt.. :)
These two examples itself should be enough to prove that it was Pak who lost the match and the Aussies won it sitting in their home drinking beer... :) I'm sure if India was bowling, Dew would have made us still lose the match. :)
Re: Against pseudo
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2010 10:20 AM
LG:
I completely agree with objective comments on the forum..
It is the general "whole world is against us and therefore we can't do well in life" syndrome that keeps coming out of these Rediff forums that bug me and bring out the cynic in me with the usually sarcastic comments. :)
The "IF this THEN that" analysis of some real experts on this forum is quite interesting though. :)
Take care.. :)
P.S.: My apologies if my "tongue-in-cheek" humour disturbs you. I shall refrain from engaging yourself in all future communications. :)
Re: Uncle Against pseudo
by JGN on Jan 07, 2010 10:08 AM
He is a USELESS guy to his employers coz he is sitting at his office desk posting utter nonsense.I hope he does some work also.
In the aftermath of the Porkis's defeat in the SCT Test yesterday, some have started demanding recall of Shahid Afridi to the Test side and making him captain, which is ridiculous to say the least. He never was a consistent player in the first place and it is a miracle he has survived for 13 years now in the national team with his mediocre show.
Re: Re: Idiotic calls for recall of Shahid Afridi
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2010 10:22 AM
LG:
Tut tut tut..... :)
Someone on the forum has very very recently advised me against adopting this kind of approach while replying to people who put their "genuine views" on the forum.... :)
This is my last communique directed towards you. :)
Enjoy the new found freedom and kindly disregard my banter with others ... :)
What is your problem, actually? You always write against, no matter what the comments are.
For GOD sake do not say I am just a cricket fan---I am sure you are not Robot.
Commenting on others comments is easier --irrespective of being right of wrong--than writing ones own posts (I think people who are afraid of being criticized or ridiculed by others, do not want to create their own posts)
Re: Re: @Against Pseudos
by LG on Jan 07, 2010 09:56 AM
AP,
Believe me, my comment is not out of anger. In fact, I have liked some of your comments but I think you overdo sometimes just for the sake of being against the main point.
As for pointing out what you said against, you are always against--sometimes being on the right side and sometimes on the wrong side.
Re: Re: Re: @Against Pseudos
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2010 10:14 AM
LG:
I completely agree with objective comments on the forum..
It is the general "whole world is against us and therefore we can't do well in life" syndrome that keeps coming out of these Rediff forums that bug me and bring out the cynic in me with the usually sarcastic comments. :)
The "IF this THEN that" analysis of some real experts on this forum is quite interesting though. :)
Re: @Against Pseudos
by JGN on Jan 07, 2010 09:08 AM
Absolutely spot on.This man or uncle against pseudo seems a failed man in his fifties now who is scolded at home and office so he vents his anger at rediff forum.
Re: Re: Re: Re: @Against Pseudos
by rocky on Jan 07, 2010 09:37 AM
C'mmon AP. U r making the same mistake as JGN (do not know his gender and no way we can make out from his name) :)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @Against Pseudos
by Against Pseudos on Jan 07, 2010 10:17 AM
Rocky:
One last question. How do you manage to "indent" your replies just at the right place even when the "Reply" button stops after the thread moves on long enough? :) Do you use some other browser than IE? :)
Re: I wonder (no point in just abusing Aussi for attacks)
by A Singh on Jan 07, 2010 08:20 AM
Your concerns for the Indians in Australia are truly admirable, but spare a thought for the Indians in India. Their condition is no better. Indian is the easiest man to beat; for individually, he is most incompetent in self-defense, and the Government of India cares too hoots for its citizens. Indians have been the world's doormats since the beginning of history. Name an aggressor who was defeated and repelled back by our forefathers. If even Indians start protesting against beating, who will the world beat then?
Re: Re: I wonder (no point in just abusing Aussi for attacks)
by LG on Jan 07, 2010 08:40 AM
A Singh,
Do you know Ancient India has knowledge and wisdom to the world, without which world would have progressed?
Unfortunately, later Indian Kings become complacent and did not care about anythings but themselves, and results are known to all--ruled and looted by foreigners.
It is not good to blames others, as it stops the desire to improve or be better.
Re: I wonder (no point in just abusing Aussi for attacks)
by Stupid BC on Jan 07, 2010 10:13 AM
Good points LG. 1. What action do you propose the Indian government take? Invade Australia (Uncle Sam, one of Australia's closest friends, wouldn't like that). Cancel trade? Australia's main trading partners are China and Japan. Indian trade is minimal. 2. Stop Aussies from playing in the IPL - that will improve the standard of the IPL (LOL). No Hayden, Gilchrist, Warne, Symonds etc - that would be a smart move. 3. Don't go to Australia - good idea. Go to the US or UK instead.
Australia did not win the match, it was Pak that lost the match.
Certain people may gives various superlatives to Ausi and its captain Ponting. But the fact is that any team that can not even score 176 runs to win the match, do not deserve a win.
we all know, the pitch was not all that bad after 1st day.
I have no doubt that had it been some other team--say for ex SA, India, or ENG--Aussi would have lost the match.
Re: Was the match won or lost?
by A Singh on Jan 07, 2010 08:06 AM
When one side wins a match, the other side loses it. True; had it not been for the pathetic catching of Kamran Akmal, Pakistan might have won by an innings. So, Pakistan lost it there. But Australia have to be praised for believing; all was not lost, when they were 8 down in their second innings. And when Pakistan batted for the second time, they were up against a very different Australian side, as compared to the one they had to face in their first innings. This Australian side was sniffing the chance, and was willing to take the chance. They were extremely focussed, and they did not let any chances go. Particularly, the catches held by Hauritz, Haddin and Johnson, were outstanding. Pakistan were simply cowed down by the Australian self-belief. So, Australia deserve all the praise.
Re: Re: Was the match won or lost?
by LG on Jan 07, 2010 08:27 AM
Do you think Aus would still have won the match if the opponent were IND, SA, or ENG?
Foreget about dropped catches or what PAk should have done before they came out to bat to score required 176 runs for a win with plenty of time left.
Any other team could have easily score 176 runs, especially when the pitch got better and better for batting as the days progressed.
Come on, when Siddle can score 38 runs on that picth, why can't five batsmen could not score 38 runs each.
Re: Re: Re: Was the match won or lost?
by S Shrikanth on Jan 07, 2010 09:17 AM
It wasn't that easy to score 176 on a wicket considering one of the teams had collapsed for 127 on the very first day.
Pak lost due to 2 reasons - 3 dropped catches of Hussey and extraordinary temperament of Hussey who masterminded the 8th wicket partnership with Siddle. And of course, Hauritz turned horrible for Pak.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Was the match won or lost?
by S Shrikanth on Jan 07, 2010 10:00 AM
And in Melbourne in 2007-2008, India lost last 5 wickets for 27 runs and lost the match.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Was the match won or lost?
by JGN on Jan 07, 2010 10:12 AM
i think if india were in the same situation they were bowled out for less than 100.
WoW !!! by sanath on Jan 06, 2010 10:53 PM | Hide replies
There was a huge uproar over Sunny's saying that Stuart Broad was being given special status becoz of his father, Chris Broad; sadly most of the comments were by Indians.
I guess it would do us good to remember November 2001 where Sachin Tendulkar was banned for one test for supposedly "removing a blade of grass from the seam", Saurav Ganguly banned for one match and two ODIs for "not controlling his team mates", Virender Sehwag fined 75% of his match fees and one test for "excessive appealing", and a couple of youngsters fined 25% of their match fees - all by Mike Denness, although there was no official complaint lodged then as well by the opposition.
Now compare this to Broad's actions of questioning the umpire and now when he was caught stamping on the ball with his spikes on as well and it is chosen to look the other way. Does that mean that removing a blade of grass changes the ball more than stamping with spikes does ?
Is it then not true that the whites are being granted special privileges as compared to Asians ?
I, as an Indian, would love if we have more Sunny Gavaskars who can call a spade a spade, and would wish we Indians learn to respect our legends more.
Re: Nice post.. Stay away Raman Silva
by S Shrikanth on Jan 07, 2010 09:23 AM
Sachin Tendulkar was let go under pressure from Jagmohan Dalmia for ball tampering in one of the series against WI. BCCI has always used its financial muscle power to protect its cricketers. Harbhajan, Sreesanth all were thorougly protected even when they heavily offended on the field.
ICC is headed by Pakistani(he dreams to have a home in Kochi) right now and then Sharad Pawar will head it. For the last 10-15 years ICC has become a subsidiary of BCCI as over 80% of the cricket money comes from India.
Re: Re: Nice post.. Stay away Raman Silva
by Abhijit Nair on Jan 07, 2010 09:54 AM
I believe now Icc is headed by a southafrican Haroon lorgat.But your rest of the views are fine
Re: Nice post.. Stay away Raman Silva
by Abhijit Nair on Jan 07, 2010 09:47 AM
Sunny is more like an Indian/Subcontinental racist .He believes that Indian/subcontinental teams can do no wrong while the australians/englishmen etc are always wrong. Michael Vaughan,the former England captain has criticised Broad and Anderson .Sachin had clearly tampered with the ball in 2001 test in SA ,although it was not delberate
Re: Re: Nice post.. Stay away Raman Silva
by S Shrikanth on Jan 07, 2010 10:07 AM
Sunny had been heavily pampered cricketer since beginning. Kanmadikar, BCCI President in 70s, was his maternal Grand father. He was further pampered by Raj Singh Doongarpur and NKP Salve in his career, now he sits with Sharad Pawar.
Gavaskar would resign from captaincy when the team has to go for a foreign tour like England, West Indies. But he would reclaim it when B teams of WI and Australia or NZ coming to India. He would political links to adjust his son to play for West Bengal.
For the last 4-5 years he is using his close links Maratha powerman Pawar to influence and manipulate the cricket world.
