House Rules
In order to try to keep the blog on an even keel, we need to set out a few ground rules to begin with. It's part and parcel of being the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ really - we have to be a bit more structured... They're very similar to the House Rules on our messageboards.
We reserve the right to fail messages which:
• Are considered likely to provoke, attack or offend others
• Are racist, sexist, homophobic, sexually explicit, abusive or otherwise objectionable
• Contain swear words or other language likely to offend
• Break the law or condone or encourage unlawful activity. This includes breach of copyright, defamation and contempt of court.
• Advertise products or services for profit
• Are seen to impersonate someone else
• Repeatedly post the same or similar messages ('spam')
• Are unrelated to the topic
• Include contact details such as telephone numbers and postal or email addresses
• Are written in anything other than English - Welsh and Gaelic may be used where marked
• Contain links to other websites which break our Editorial Guidelines
• Describe or encourage activities which could endanger the safety or well-being of others
We may also occasionally close comments on a post if we think the discussion has become irrelevant.
The ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ welcomes feedback, both positive and negative, but we want to keep our blog as focused on the tournament, and people's experiences of it, as possible. For this reason, messages not relevant to the post will be removed. Please consider directing coverage comments to our Sport Editors' Blog at /blogs/sporteditors/.
If you have a complaint about anything on the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ Sport website, please .
Repeatedly posting personal or offensive comments about individual members of the public or people who work for the ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ may be considered harassment. We reserve the right to remove such messages and take action against those responsible.
°ä´Ç³¾³¾±ð²Ô³Ù²õÌýÌýPost your comment
LACK OF CONSISTNACY
The teams, both Pakistan and India are well balanced. Winning and loosing depend on how the team perform on the day. However, both teams lack the basics of fielding. If India looses the 2nd ODI after a good score of 321, the performance on the day came from the pakistanis out of sheer determination to win the match.The Indians, on the other hand flopped in the balling and fielding areas. They performed well to post wins in the 1st and the 3rd ODIs as they did little better than the Pakistanis. This consistancey in their performance does not prevail in both teams. It keeps evading them. However, without a professional coach, Indians are doing well. If Pakistanis want to defeat India, they must ploy with the BCCI to appoint a foreign coach, as Greig Chapell, who went all out to out do team India.
Complain about this comment
LACK OF CONSISTNACY
The teams, both Pakistan and India are well balanced. Winning and loosing depend on how the team perform on the day. However, both teams lack the basics of fielding. If India looses the 2nd ODI after a good score of 321, the performance on the day came from the pakistanis out of sheer determination to win the match.The Indians, on the other hand flopped in the balling and fielding areas. They performed well to post wins in the 1st and the 3rd ODIs as they did little better than the Pakistanis. This consistancey in their performance does not prevail in both teams. It keeps evading them. However, without a professional coach, Indians are doing well. If Pakistanis want to defeat India, they must ploy with the BCCI to appoint a foreign coach, as Greig Chapell, who went all out to out do team India.
Complain about this comment
The teams, both Pakistan and India are well balanced. Winning and loosing depend on how the team perform on the day. However, both teams lack the basics of fielding. If India looses the 2nd ODI after a good score of 321, the performance on the day came from the pakistanis out of sheer determination to win the match.The Indians, on the other hand flopped in the balling and fielding areas. They performed well to post wins in the 1st and the 3rd ODIs as they did little better than the Pakistanis. This consistancey in their performance does not prevail in both teams. It keeps evading them. However, without a professional coach, Indians are doing well. If Pakistanis want to defeat India, they must ploy with the BCCI to appoint a foreign coach, as Greig Chapell, who went all out to out do team India.
Complain about this comment
Considering that a score in the 90s is as valuable as a 100, Tendulkar's recent flurry of 90s deserve notice. In the offcial stats of players we should now count half centuries, Tendturies (score in the 90s) and centuries. Many players are tired or too eager once they have reached the 90s and thus prone to mistakes. This new method will give them the credit they deserve.
Complain about this comment
Hi everyone,
Michael Vaughan reminded us this week just why he is just about the only man who can get the best out of Steve Harmison.
Why? Because he is always talking about what Harmison is capabale of and how he can be such an asset to the team.
He is always FOR Harmison at his best, not constantly undermining the guy's confidence.
Bowling at 85-90mph is incredibly difficult - most of us cannot do it. Harmy can, but he needs a steady man at the tiller.
Let's all get behind the team and trust Vaughan to get it right.
ANd if HArmy has a bad game or gets left out, having a moan about him is not going to help.
We all know he has real talent so let's just keep encouraging him and keep our fingers crossed.
And btw, i think broad is possibly a better batter than the wicket keeper. does he deserve to bowl in the tests and bat at least at no.8? if harmy doesn't play, shouldn't we pick broad ahead of, say, bopara?
Complain about this comment
Have England picked only 11 players for the current game? Are they actually treating it like a proper game of Cricket? Perhaps 500-5 has finally made them wake up to the fact that if you treat something like an outdoor net session you might end up spending two days in the field.
Complain about this comment
TO Phillip,
How can going to a UNion conference, especially on a Test Match weekend, be considered "good parenting"?
Get Tellytubbies on and don't worry about it.
Phil
Complain about this comment
Gus Fraser asks what a collection of coaches is known as - surelt it's a "TRAIN"
Complain about this comment
I find Terry Jenner's comments out of place. Take Murali's achievements in a broader context. His country has been embroiled in civil war throughout his career and he and his team mates have given his people something to be proud of whilst other disasters such as the Tsunami have taken place. I am an England fan and wish that our boys had the ability to show the passion, professionalism and will to win that Murali has shown. Jenner's comments are out of place and betray the kind of bitterness that has become all too common. Perhaps he should take a leaf out of his protege's book and show some grace in apreciating a truly great talent. He is absolutlely right - Wisden will reflect none of his objections and therefore he should have the sense to give credit where it is due.
Complain about this comment
Dodgy catching decisions come about because players at the top of cricket routinely cheat and are allowed to get away with it. With notable exceptions, players don't walk when they have had a clear nick, Wicket keepers claim runouts when the ball isn't in the gloves, fielders don't stand up and acknowledge a 4 when they are clearly on the rope and anything that ends up in their hand is claimed as a catch.
OK - no-one wants to slow down the game, so why not use the technology and take action afterwards? Batsmen who clearly nick it and don't walk should be banned for the next six months. Fielders who appeal for a catch that clearly is not, same penalty. Fielders used to say " not sure Ump" and leave it to the Ump or the batsman if either had a better view.
To balance things, each team should have 2 appeals to the Tv Ump per innings. Eliminate the really bad nicks onto pad.
Complain about this comment
Going back to this lunchtime;s converstaions about too much cricket being played, can I ask what is likely to happen if there are any new test playing nations added to the schedlues, the likes of Kenya or Ireland for instance?
With the next few years already sounding like they are fully booked, there would seem to be little encouragment for new nations to try to progress to test level.
Any thoughts?
Complain about this comment
I remember singing in a production of 'David' by Roger Jones at Springvale Primary School, Wolverhampton circa 1980. I was one of six singing the bit when Goliath was killed. We even bought the musical score. Fantastic!
Complain about this comment
To the tune of Spider-Man:
" Sidey-Man, Sidey-Man, does what ever a Sidey can. Swings a ball either way, catches batman easy as pie. Look out here's comes the Sideeeey-Man"
Complain about this comment
IS ENGLAND'S CRICKET MANAGEMENT COMPETENT?
Altho a couple of the England players clearly should not be there - Prior and Bopara - I think that basically we have a good set of players. They lack though the knowledge and motivation that it takes at this level.
How can England aspire to have a decent competitive team when the management lacks experience at the top level?
I'm thinking of:
David Graveney, Chairman of Selectors. Never played a Test.
Peter Moores, Manager - a decent county pro.
Otis Gibson, Bowling Coach - a few appearances for a second-rate WI team.
Mark Garroway, Team Analyst - has he ever played even county cricket?
David Parsons, Director of Performance - did he even play county cricket?
Richard Halsall, Fielding Coach - don't think he has even played first-class cricket.
One of two of my above facts may need checking and I'm sure that they all give everything to the job. Can they ever though take England to the highest level? The answer to me is pretty obvious.
Complain about this comment
when will the selectors; many commentators learn that you always pick the best keeper irrespective of batting ability. we do not expect specialist fast bowlers to betop class batsmen so why wicket keepers?
Complain about this comment
The lack of sportmanship in cricket is well rooted now. When I played in the 70s and 80s through schools and clubs, sledging was non existent. I believe it is the true cause of the heated rivalry between teams and should be driven out of the game entirely. We expect spectators to sit still behind the bowler's arm, but allow close-in fielders to chat and verbally abuse batsmen while awaiting each delivery, to upset concentration. This is no example to set to youngsters. Also, batsmen with integrity walk; bowlers/fielders with integrity do not appeal when they know that the player is not out. I watch a lot of sport and cricket is not alone (handball in football unnoticed results in a goal). I did watch a bit of the Ryder Cup 2004 last night and noticed how Luke Donald and Sergio Garcia shook hands and commiserated with their American opponents and caddies after an 18th hole victory, before even thinking about shaking hands and hugging each other after a crucial victory. Cricketers could learn a lot from golf, especailly recalling the huge furore that accompanied a successful 18th hole US putt while Olazabal was still waiting to play his shot for a half in 1999. Apologies were accepted, yet I see no apologies coming from the arrogant Australians.
Complain about this comment
I recently listened to the TMS commentary during the Sri Lanka v England series. I recall a conversation about umpire standards between some of the commentary team. One of the commentators (I can't recall who) had drawn up a list of the most inconsistant upires and top of this was Steve Bucknor. After his miserable performance in the last Australia v India match i have to agree.
Umpires are only human and mistakes are going to happen but when one mans decisions cost a team the match ,then action has to be taken. Steve Bucknor not only cost India the match but arguably denied them a win that would have led to an exciting conclusion of this series.
Complain about this comment
Couldn't agree more aggers! We don't want cricket to end up like football where there is no respect for traditions and fairplay. Yes there is bound to be some conning of the umpire and this has happened with all nations, Atherton against Donald when he was caught but didn't walk is one English example! Australia however are the main proponents of winning at all costs and not playing within the spirit of the game. As someone who has lived in Australia and played cricket against many talented Australians I find this very sad, as do many Aussies! So sort it out ICC!
Complain about this comment
WHEN I WAS A YOUNG MAN IT WAS ACCEPTED PRACTICE TO WALK WHEN YOU KNEW YOU WERE OUT.tHIS WAS AT ALL LEVELS OF CRICKET.HAS THIS NOW CHANGED AND PLAYERS ARE HAPPY IN EFFECT TO CHEAT? IF SO THEN THE GAME IS SURELY NO LONGER WORTH PLAYING.
Complain about this comment
There are three overriding principles in cricket:-
1. The umpire is always right
2. All players should be treated equally and fairly
3.The benefit of the doubt goes to the batsman
However , the first principle outweighs the other two. If players cannot accept that then they are not fit to play the game.
Cricket is not football but unfortunately the attitudes of the latter now appear to be taking over the former. Football managers often criticise referees for "bad" decisions which affect their teams yet don't seem capable of accepting genuine mistakes; as for praising a ref for a good game, we would wait 'til hell freezes over. Players cheat and managers back them up by having a go at the referees. As in football, so now in cricket. If something goes wrong it must be the umpire's fault. The umpire (neutral) clearly is a cheat, whereas the players would never stoop so low!
The job of a player is to win within the laws of the game and it is the job of the umpire to apply those laws. A bowler or fielder asks "howzatt" and the umpire decides, assisted by such technology as is available to him. The problem is not with fielders appealing for doubtful dismissals or scuffing up the ball (that is part of the game) nor with umpires getting decisions wrong from time to time; it is with players who lack the formal logic to understand that a game cannot be played without laws or rules and to accept that once the umpire has made his decision then that should not be further questionned by the players during the game, because the game has to continue. If, after due enquiry, the authorities decide that an umpire has cheated or is incompetent then that is a decision for them, but to "suspend" umpires during a tour when no finding has been made is pure nonsense. But then, it is in keeping with the way most other accusations are dealt with in public life these days; suspend first and ask questions later, no matter how the decision destroys the reputation of the person suspended, as well as damaging public confidence in the system and tarnishing the image of the institution concerned.
The umpire is the judge of what is fair and unfair play and he has the power to enforce his judgments. He is the person on the field of play and is therefore the person best placed to judge the situations which may arise. He can tell if intimidation is being used, whether in the form of "sledging", constant appeals or whatever. All he has to do is warn the captain and player concerned that if it happens again, the player will be sent off. The umpire could also decline to give a batsman out if he thinks that the batsman has been unfairly "pressured" out; after all, it is not permissible to put a batsman off to get him out.
If cricket authorities support umpires in their decisions on the field and instruct captains to do so then the cheats will have nowhere to go. The trouble is that cricket is now big business and when did big business ever worry about anything other than money? "Keep the punters happy" is the message and unfortunately the punters don't understand or care about principles. When they do , sense will return.
By the way, why don't batsmen walk to the wicket and start to sledge the fielders? Because if they did the umpires would intervene. The point about sledging by fielders is that it is an accepted custom/tactic which not even most batsmen would seek to eliminate and the batsman's defence is to come back with a witty or abrasive comment in return and hopefully alot of runs. However, the umpire's job is to keep this within bounds, so that the batsman is not unfairly intimidated; the umpire has to judge the situation and sometimes may come up with different decisions in seemingly similar situations. If someone calls another person "monkey" then, depending on the circumstances, that could be a criminal offence. The point about the offensiveness of the word "monkey" is that the offense lies in the implication that the person is less than human. The question is whether the context of the remark is relevant or not. If someone wishes to be nasty to someone else then any word could be used offensively; it is the tone and body language of the speaker which give away the intent behind the remark. If the word "monkey" is said to someone in an intimidatory way then the question is whether it is a "racist" remark as well as being generally offensive. Is it racist simply because it is said by a person of one race to a person of another race? Could it be racist if said by a person of one race to a person of the same race? See the difficulty? Is it racist if it said by a white man to a white man, a black man to a black man? It is wrong to be offensive to anyone without just cause and calling someone a monkey with the intent to belittle them as less than human is insulting and has no place in cricket; but let's get away from worrying about racism; that is for the criminal authorities and all the cricket authorities have to decide is whether it went beyond fair play and if it was said.
Complain about this comment
what about indias monkey chant on andrew syommonds back in india has everybody forgotten that incident??just like football its happening in cricket why should india get away with and then they deny harbajan of rascist comment !!!
Complain about this comment
As an Aussie cricket-lover, I am ashamed to say that my national team must shoulder responsibility for a deplorable trend in international cricket. However opposition-baiting, umpire-questioning, intimidatory appealing and cheating have been allowed by the ICC to become rife. The impact of seeing our heroes' behaviour go unpunished has been hinted at in the above correspondence.
Yet there are simple solutions which won't change the basic mechanics of the game.
In the spirit of cricket we need to put the onus back on players to adjudicate. They are usually the best placed on the field to do this. If they can't agree on a decision it goes to the field umpire or third umpire if the field umpire so chooses.
If they don't like a decision, whether made by the opposition or the field umpire, the batsman or fielding captain only, may appeal to the TV umpire. Once three appeals per team per innings have been refused as clearly erroneous that team may no longer appeal to the TV umpire. Captains and batsmen will have to think very carefully before questioning an lbw decision!!
The effect of this is that the incentive to 'stand your ground' (cheat) is removed. By the same token situations like Dravid's horror dismissal in Sydney can be easily rectified. Once players realize this the involvement of technology will be minimal. With the players given responsibility for the decisions they can be rightly brought to task ( and disciplined) if they are shown to be cheating on a regular basis.
Abuse on the field needs zero tolerance and microphones on the batsmen to police what is said. Intimidatory appealing and umpire-questioning (outside the formal appeals process) must attract suspension of bowling and close-in fielding privileges.
Complain about this comment
Does anyone know Ricky Pontings email address ? I would like to tell him that we - cricket lovers of all nationalites - will remember him only for the damage his leadership has done to cricket - not the fact that his team won many matches in a row.
Complain about this comment
Mr Agnew's comment on the Australian cricket team was spot on. How the ICC has allowed this to go on for so long is unbelievable. Surely the umpires must hear a lot of what goes on and action should be taken. It is totally unacceptable to try to cheat one's way to a win. The ICC should consider some action to take Australia to task, such as suspending Australia for a period-if any of the countries threaten something like this, the ICC are straight on their case and banning them. Its about time the ICC stood up and be counted. The Australians are ruining a great game-why do they do it when in doing so they know they have not really won at all and lose all respect.
Complain about this comment
Hi
This bussiness of replacing Umpires in international cricket because the players can't play to the rules. This undermines everything sporting about the game of cricket, what ever happened to "the umpires decision being final".
An umpires position in cricket is already being undermined, not only by the ability to have replays to check a decision, but continuous replays on TV. An umpire may have less than a second to make a judgement and it is inevitable that mistakes will happen. What happens today in cricket has gone on for years, but no one moaned, they just accepted the umpires decision.
Complain about this comment
I would just like to comment on the commentry of the tour of NZ. I have lived in NZ for five years and have found the one eyed commentry terrible, all we heard where excuses about the NZ middle order having no practise. Rubbish who do they think there kidding. If it wasnt for a shocking umpire decision the game would have been over after 30 overs. I hope the likes of Hussain and Atherton take a leaf out of Mark Nicholas book and call the game as it is, not just pleasing another countrys press. It makes unjoyable veiwing for all x-pats. And please please somebody teach Simon Doull how to commentate his comment "I dont care about England" surely becomes unproffesional. Keep it up boys 3-2 seems a real possability
Complain about this comment
I would just like to comment on the commentry of the tour of NZ. I have lived in NZ for five years and have found the one eyed commentry terrible, all we heard where excuses about the NZ middle order having no practise. Rubbish who do they think there kidding. If it wasnt for a shocking umpire decision the game would have been over after 30 overs. I hope the likes of Hussain and Atherton take a leaf out of Mark Nicholas book and call the game as it is, not just pleasing another countrys press. It makes unjoyable veiwing for all x-pats. And please please somebody teach Simon Doull how to commentate his comment "I dont care about England" surely becomes unproffesional. Keep it up boys 3-2 seems a real possability
Complain about this comment
there will soon be as many officials as players wont there?
Complain about this comment
It's the same old story England are still not good enough at one day cricket or at test match level, they need to get back to learning the basics of the game,and instill some allround confidence.
Complain about this comment
Ben, if Harmison is Jungle, then what other music best describes other players? Vettori must be into Boy Bands whereas I can quite imagine Hoggard doing a bit of line dancing to some good old Country...
Complain about this comment
Since Peter Moores succeeded Duncan Fletcher have the England team improved in any facet of the game? Nope! There seems to be both character (Colllingwood & Sidebottom) plus skill (Pietersen) within the team but confidence and strategy seems to be lacking.
There is only one international Test side that any English supporter would be confident of beating and that is Bangladesh.
As a fan of cricket there can be no worse sight than Harmison toiling miserably in every game. Where is the appetite? Excuses and more excuses belittle the supporters who spend thousands of pounds following their team.
Complain about this comment
England need the same treatment as Warren Gatland has given to Welsh rugby. There seems to be an acceptance of mediocrity in English cricket which should not be tolerated by the coach.Even yesterday after Wales' win against Ireland, Gatland promised a "roasting" to two players who had been yellow carded.
Come on England - your cricket should be the best in the world.
Complain about this comment
I'm fed up with the English players saying that to compete in the Ashes in 2 years time they need to perform well in NZ - as if the Ashes is the only motivator...they need to be psyched up for each and every series - not treating anyone but Australia as second -rate opposition. The Ashes win lured England into a false sense of security; we are far from the 2nd best team in the world on current form - and the players and management need to accept this...and act accordingly. as for Harmison, nice guy - but obvously his mega pay package is not motivation enough for him to perform; he's a home bird and that's where he should be, with his family...put him out of his misery NOW...
Complain about this comment
Hi there
There is general consensus in New Zealand that their sports men and women punch above their weight. Once again this statement rings true following the performance of the Black Caps in the first test in Hamilton.
This Blacks caps team was given little chance in the One Day series and even less in the tests by most who watch the game here.
The players however have a pride in playing for their country that seems distictly lacking in the England team barring one or two exceptions.
The only thing that may save England in Wellington is the unpredictable nature of the weather in New Zealands capital.
Complain about this comment
I have been constantly reading articles where England are continuely referred to being a better side on paper than New Zealand.
The issue I have is the inuendo that New Zealand are not very good cricketers.
In my view while New Zealand is not a complete side they do actually have some ability and have some world class performers.
In terms of one day cricket New Zealand have consistently been stronger that England in one day cricket over the past decade or so.
Granted, England have a more complete and stronger test side but unless they perform as a unit and to there potential the kiwi's are good and talented enough to beat them.
Complain about this comment
i'm out in Sabah Malaysia + Like a lot of other listeners can't hear live ³ÉÈË¿ìÊÖ TMS commentary via the 'net' (not sure why?) & can't get any radio - digital or otherwise!
if cricket buffs want to hear live ball by ball coverage - albeit in an NZ accent - then type "sports radio nz" into Google, up comes 'Radio Sport - Just Sport', click on "listen live" & there's what you want & ocassionally TMS commentators do 'guest' spots as well!
come on England - get stuck in & grind out a superb series win!
cheers
Steven Robbins
+++
Complain about this comment
With 2 days to go, why did'nt Engalnd bat through the order? As it is, the Kiwi's just have to plod along and get the runs. Remember T. Bailey and Willie Watson anyone?
Complain about this comment
With the New Zealand touring squad about to be announced at the end of this test match and considering the relative ease with which England have won this series, one wonders about the poor standard of both the touring squad and also, the poor preparation for the Ashes England are going to get by not playing competitive cricket.
It seems an utterly stupid decision for the NZC to ban some of their top players (especially Shane Bond, Hamish Marshall and Lou Vincent), for now they are forced to choose the likes of Southee, Bell and How as replacements. When one adds Fleming's retirement to that list, it seems obvious that New Zealand will not provide the stiff opposition that they once promised. After New Zealand have progressed to being a genuinely competitive team in the last few years at Test level, they seem destined to plummet to the recent depths of international cricket set by Bangladesh and West Indies, with the exception of the odd player.
As for England's preparation, if New Zealand's banned players are not reinstated, England will walk the home series, all the batsmen will get a bucket of runs and any picked bowler will reap rich rewards against such an inferior side. This creates a problem for English cricket. As Boycs has mentioned, England have just over a year to prepare for the Ashes and this will not be the best preparation for the Ashes or the series against South Africa which we may be in danger of losing. Players like Strauss, Vaughan, Hoggard, Harmison, Anderson looking for consistent form and players like Sidebottom and Broad not automatically on the Ashes teamsheet, they need a proper test to improve their competetive games for the challenges to come.
Of course, if the ICL increases in stature over the next year or so, may it be possible for Australia or England to ban some players? If that were the case, we may or may not have a better chance of winning the Ashes, but the excitement for the Ashes would be seriously affected if it is not a proper contest. What we want is a repeat performance of the greatest Ashes series ever in 2005 and it is shaping up to be, if the ICL and the BCCI don't ruin it.
Complain about this comment