Whether it is the teams of South Africa, England or Australia, they never show the gentlemanly behavior by which cricket is believed to be characterized. But unfortunately in most controversial instances, it is cricketers from these countries who have behaved ungentlemanly on as well as off field (look at what Vaughan has said). People appreciate such gestures as shown by the team India, perhaps only for a day or two, but when you open the pages of cricket almanac you see who won how many matches and made centuries. I am not saying that one should not uphold the true spirit of the game, but only when it is reciprocated in the same manner. If the team England also gave a hoot to the true spirit of the game then we would not have had such controversies as throwing jelly beans at their opponents or applying Vaseline to the ball (recall the controversy the involved John lever who was accused of applying Vaseline to the ball so that it would turn) or calling them cheats. It was pathetic to see Indian bowlers and fielders giving so many boundaries and running haplessly after the ball. One just felt that where our players were standing and why they were letting the boundaries go. There was no passion on field yesterday among the Indian players; they seemed to resign to their bashing. Praveen Kumar, who is said to speak very little English, was sharing something very important with a smile with Prior who looked abusive of Sreesant who had said something to Prior to provoke him. The p
Re: The Bell controversy
by Pradeep Shinde on Aug 02, 2011 12:05 AM
The point is that our players never tend to be passionate and reasonably aggressive towards whoever they play with, except Yuvraj and Sreesant, who at times overdoes it, to the point that he would look silly. Just be passionate and also reasonably aggressive so that we can win matches. We are not there to please anybody, but to play cricket. We need Viv Richards Rantungas, Gavskars, Miandads, and Gangulis to show how to deal with the teams of England, Australia and South Africa. How big humbug the spirit of the game for English fans is can be seen from their reaction to Bell's dismissal yesterday. If the crowd really looked at it with the sportsman's spirit, they would not have booed the Indian team after the dismissal. It clearly shows that the English crowd was only concerned with the bashing of the Indian bowlers and their country winning not with the upholding of the true spirit of the game, given that Bell was clearly out. The English team shamelessly seizing the magnanimity offered by the team India showed respect to the sentiments of their booing countrymen. Will the team India think of their countrymen who treat cricket as a religion and shower their cricketers with great adulation in a similar manner? The answer, by seeing the commercialization of cricket, is no, because our cricketers seem to be more after money than play cricket with determination and grit.
Absolute credit must go to the team India and who else? To the team England and for what? I fail to understand why the team England? Perhaps for shamelessly grabbing the chance to ask Bell to play? If Bell was out, why did he come back to play? The team England must have discussed the situation in the meeting following the team India’s idiotic offer. If the team England had also thought about the magnanimous reversal of the decision of the umpire that Bell was out then they should not have asked Bell to play which would mean that they upheld the true spirit of the game. But the team England did not want to do that simply because they wanted more runs to win the test. Who the hell cares about the spirit of the game? On the contrary the team India always indulges in such a monkey business rather playing hard hitting cricket? The team Australia has many a times in the past blatantly abused the spirit of the game by abusing their opponents on field, but what happened? (DO not forget the dirty politics played against the great spin legend Murali.) Nothing. They were not only called champions by some, but true champions. Why? It is because they never let emotions meddle while playing. If asked about the team Australia’s on-field behavior, they would simply brush up the abusing of their opponents by attributing it to their emotions on field. But when others do that then it becomes a big problem for them as well as for the game of cricket. Whether it is th
Absoloute credit? which side of your body you are talking from? Dhoni will be remembered for bending over for the English when Bell was legally out. Do you think, the English would have done the same?
I remembr in 80s when Gundappa Vishwanath was captain of Indian team, he did a similar bending over when Tony Greig was given out. Gundappa ran after Tony Greig to the boundary and requested him to come back and play. Tony Greig went on to make a century and India lost miserably.
Why don't you ask for Dhoni to be made General of Indian Army. He can then request Pakis to come back and retake Kargill!!!
I can assure you that no English team would ever have done what the Indian team did. In 1979 Vishwanath called back Bob Taylor. In 1980 recall how they ran Srikanth out in his debut test.
aggresion on Laxman shows the intent and pre-planned moves. Angrez were studying all the batting moves by indians and give no chance to indian even if the BALL IS 1 millimeter away FROM HITTING BAT by using TECHNOLOGY.
ANGREZ are using automated technology calibration to trap india by tech. Not much different from how business and miltary technology was/is used between india, pak, china, etc after they divided everyone on contentious religion and boundary issues.. All videshis apply the same policies as friendly blocks or opposing blocks.
this was the planning behind DRS and india agreed for partial DRS to fall into that trap.
It is soooooo nice to have the black and brown henchmen of the "safed aadmi" praising us. No matter they use all means, fair and foul, to beat us into submission and see that we stay there.
If it is in the spirit of the game, then why ICC with draw having runners for injured batsmen or bowlers to have drink during play? After all ICC is administering a " Gentleman;s Game".
