Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 5, 2016 8:43:14 GMT
Funny how the homesick boy is still in the UK. He was the guest of honour at a community event in Whitechapel yesterday.
And it seems like he's in no hurry to get home and will be around for a while : he's apparently due to see a UK specialist about his shoulder in 2-3 weeks time.
It must be only when he's playing cicket that he gets homesick...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 3, 2016 10:06:35 GMT
Misses the entire series v England and may be out for 4-5 months, although there is apparently an outside chance he might be fit for the series v NZ which starts after Xmas.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Nov 7, 2016 10:06:15 GMT
News that Mr Fizz will resume training for selection for the first time since his injuries required him to have an operation, while he was contracted for Sussex last summer. www.espncricinfo.com/bangladesh/content/story/1064799.htmlIt was reported at the time that Sussex had paid for the operation, presumably as part of the overall contract for the player's services, but nothing more has been published that I have seen. I wonder if softandfluffy touched on this in his recent interview with Zac Toumazi, as Toumazi was quoted as a source for the original statement? |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Nov 7, 2016 10:15:44 GMT
Unfortunately, there were certain sensitive areas including Monty Panesar, Chris Adams and Mr Fizz. The final and published draft
approved by Zac excluded such topics.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Nov 7, 2016 14:28:44 GMT
Unfortunately, there were certain sensitive areas including Monty Panesar, Chris Adams and Mr Fizz. The final and published draft approved by Zac excluded such topics. Disappointing, if not entirely surprising, that Zac should not wish to be published talking about some of the key issues under his stewardship: how to cope with a situation when mental health problems challenge the authority of the management; the difficulties encountered when a relationship turns sour and the old king is regarded with hostility by his former courtiers; and the realpolitik of handling new stardom in the global T20 age. This is not said to lay any blame on Zac, who comes across as a decent sort of chap, but they are issues that lie at the heart of how an organisation manages change in the environment and expectation amongst its consumers. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Nov 7, 2016 15:06:31 GMT
Hhs, As vested interests and the establishment intensify to control their positions via information, county cricket is a tiny microcosm of that. Tightrope walking the line between appeasement and provocation is increasingly becoming more difficult. 'You are either one of us or you're not' is becoming ever more prevalent. The phrase 'you can't run with the hare and hunt with the hounds' has been uttered to me on various occasions at the club but, perhaps naively, I believe it is possible. And why my journalist creed of, "Praise where praise is due but constructively criticise when criticism is due." Yet, my club critics have described me as 'a loose cannon' and 'someone not to be trusted' because of this creed. And why this Forum is an extraordinary blessing. We can write things that cricket journalists, cricket PR people and other media types would not or cannot dare to say due to their jobs and a breaking of the unwritten employer's code. I respect Zac Toumazi. I think he has been a positive force for Sussex CCC, so I accept his wishes. Yes, I was disappointed when the first draft was returned sanitised, red-inked and watered down but that's the way of the world - particularly county cricket - where such a niche market can easily emphasise this vested interest politics. But I accept it and let it be. PS: There is vanity and then there is boasting. Liking your own post is taking this to new levels.  |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Nov 7, 2016 15:51:00 GMT
Hhs, As vested interests and the establishment intensify to control their positions via information, county cricket is a tiny microcosm of that. Tightrope walking the line between appeasement and provocation is increasingly becoming more difficult. 'You are either one of us or you're not' is becoming ever more prevalent. The phrase 'you can't run with the hare and hunt with the hounds' has been uttered to me on various occasions at the club but, perhaps naively, I believe it is possible. And why my journalist creed of, "Praise where praise is due but constructively criticise when criticism is due." Yet, my club critics have described me as 'a loose cannon' and 'someone not to be trusted' because of this creed. And why this Forum is an extraordinary blessing. We can write things that cricket journalists, cricket PR people and other media types would not or cannot dare to say due to their jobs and a breaking of the unwritten employer's code. I respect Zac Toumazi. I think he has been a positive force for Sussex CCC, so I accept his wishes. Yes, I was disappointed when the first draft was returned sanitised, red-inked and watered down but that's the way of the world - particularly county cricket - where such a niche market can easily emphasise this vested interest politics. But I accept it and let it be. PS: There is vanity and then there is boasting. Liking your own post is taking this to new levels. But you have succeeded in flushing out Zac's and Sussex's vulnerabilities. He has actually identified them for you, and his refusal to authorise publication of any discussion is much more telling than the publication of an anodyne, wishy washy response to the Panesar, Adams, and Fizz issues. Well done, fluffers! |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Nov 7, 2016 16:46:54 GMT
Fb, That is not my interpretation of what I wrote.  What I mean is that journalism today is the lap dog of vested interests. We see this in the US elections where the mainstream media are little more than a PR Company for the DNC. You may have seen a Wikileaks email published on Sunday - from CNN to Hillary's advisors asking them for suggested questions for an impending Donald Trump interview. Journalism has lost its shame. Technology has so wounded this once proliferate profession that to survive it must pander to their advertising clients and to big business. Cricket is a microcosm of this. So, when a journalist agrees to article approval, today, you fully expect a watering-down. Twenty years ago that wasn't the case. In those days, approval wasn't even considered. An example I have written about before was when I wrote an article about Chris Watts just after he had been named as Head of the ECB Anti-Corruption Unit. A lovely man, we got on really well. The interview flowed. I sent the finished piece to the ECB media office for approval. Over 60% had been red-inked out when it was emailed back. If this was the 1960s, people would be saying only Russia could do such a thing. The media today are a major part of the 1984 Orwellian nightmare that we the public find ourselves in. They are used by the State as part of the mind control and brain-washing that occurs 24/7; where technology has only added ease to this process. Democracy is only sub-serviant to the wealthiest and most powerful people - the 1% elite as they are now referred to - and the media are their willing servants. So, being a journalist today, one has to accept this Russian-esque oppression and why writing on the forum is such a joy and a wonderful expression of freedom. |
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Nov 7, 2016 18:02:08 GMT
Fb, That is not my interpretation of what I wrote. What I mean is that journalism today is the lap dog of vested interests. We see this in the US elections where the mainstream media are little more than a PR Company for the DNC. You may have seen a Wikileaks email published on Sunday - from CNN to Hillary's advisors asking them for suggested questions for an impending Donald Trump interview. Journalism has lost its shame. Technology has so wounded this once proliferate profession that to survive it must pander to their advertising clients and to big business. Cricket is a microcosm of this. So, when a journalist agrees to article approval, today, you fully expect a watering-down. Twenty years ago that wasn't the case. In those days, approval wasn't even considered. An example I have written about before was when I wrote an article about Chris Watts just after he had been named as Head of the ECB Anti-Corruption Unit. A lovely man, we got on really well. The interview flowed. I sent the finished piece to the ECB media office for approval. Over 60% had been red-inked out when it was emailed back. If this was the 1960s, people would be saying only Russia could do such a thing. The media today are a major part of the 1984 Orwellian nightmare that we the public find ourselves in. They are used by the State as part
of the mind control and brain-washing that occurs 24/7; where technology has only added ease to this process. Democracy is only sub-serviant to the wealthiest and most powerful people - the 1% elite as they are now referred to - and the media are their willing servants. So, being a journalist today, one has to accept this Russian-esque oppression and why writing on the forum is such a joy and a wonderful expression of freedom. 1. We'll have to agree to differ re the disclosure of Zac's sensitive areas (no double entendre intended!) 2. With the exception of modern investigative journalism, surely? |
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on May 29, 2017 8:17:33 GMT
Awfully tempting to reply in kind to this Tweet from Mr Fizz, presumably relating to the Champions Trophy. I'm sure those who waited throught the first half of last year for the promise that was unfulfilled will have their own response. |
|
|
|
Post by joe on May 29, 2017 9:06:08 GMT
Not so much a Fizz, more a whimper.
|
|
