|
|
Post by flashblade on Jul 16, 2014 15:52:58 GMT
But the allegations were formally laid to the match referee last Thursday/Friday and he felt obliged to call in the ICC lawyers immediately. So how is the ECB in any way "surprised" about it five days later? Once the allegations had been lodged and the ICC had not brokered a deal, the matter was no longer in the hands of the Indians as it had entered a legal process under the control of the ICC (although presumably the Indians could inform the ICC at any stage that they wished to withdraw?) As for your second point, if the ECB believes the Indian claim to be vexatious (which is what in effect Cook has said today by describing it as a destabilising "tactic"), they would be better advised to adopt the high moral ground rather than getting down in the gutter with their own vexatious "counter-claim" over a matter they have already peremptorily dismissed as "minor". It is now for the ICC not the ECB to rule whether the matter was minor or not. Andreson and Jadeja have been told not to comment and it would surely be better if the ECB, Cook and MS Dhoni were also told to shut up and stop spinning while we wait for the formal procedures to take their quasi-judicial course. Meanwhile, it will all add some terrific spice to the second Test. But do you really believe the ECB comes out of this with any credit or credibility? None of us knows what went on, so we all need to be patient and let things take their course. I was just a little troubled by your apparent anti-ECB agenda. You seemed determined to find fault with the ECB's statement, and I was only trying to show how it could be objectively interpreted. I am worried that you journos sometimes let your personal views/prejudices get in the way of objective reporting! Perhaps you don't aim or claim to be objective . .  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 16, 2014 22:22:48 GMT
Nick Hoult in The Telegraph:
"The incident was reported to the ICC on Friday, within 24 hours of it occurring, and such was the severity of the claims the governing body flew one of its lawyers from Dubai to Nottingham to take statements from the teams.
Initially, the ECB offered to deal with it internally but this was rejected by the Indian board (BCCI) when it was told any punishment for Anderson would not include a ban.
The incident blew up during the final over before lunch on Thursday last week when Anderson had an appeal for a catch behind off Jadeja turned down.
Dhoni was batting with Jadeja and they left the field together but the Indian captain did not witness the incident. Cook also said he did not see it. “I’m going to sound a little bit like Arsène Wenger. I genuinely didn’t see the incident,” he said.
Unfortunately for England, it appears two Indian squad players – thought to be Ishwar Pandey and Pankaj Singh – did see it, along with a member of the backroom team. They have given statements to the ICC."
If India are correct that they have the irrefutable evidence to ensure he is toh ghus gaya ("he's a goner" in Hindi) and the ICC commissioner finds the case against Anderson to be proven, the ECB and Cook will not only have lost their best bowler but will have to issue grovelling apologies to Jadeja, Dhoni and the BCCI, whom they have effectively called liars.
One hopes it doesn't come to that and Anderson is cleared. But the ECB's belligerent response has been ill-advised and has the potential to leave them hugely embarrassed. A more circumspect response along the lines of 'no further comment until the ICC has concluded its investigation' would surely have been more sensible.
What's more, the sequence of events in which England officals were interviewed by an ICC lawyer last Friday makes Cooks's claim today quite bizarre. According to the England captain: "No-one knew about it until after the game. It does seem a bit of a surprise that I got a text message and a phone call on Monday afternoon. I literally hadn't heard anything about it."
So are we to believe that Downton and Moores knew about the ICC charge but kept it from Cook until after the match - and then informed him via a text message? This tale gets odder and odder by the hour.
|
|
wally
2nd XI player
Posts: 178
|
Post by wally on Jul 16, 2014 23:46:02 GMT
Did Anderson hit him in the head like Warner did to Root? The allegation as I understand it is that Jadeja approached him to complain about his sledging and Anderson pushed him away.
Handbags.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jul 17, 2014 7:33:23 GMT
Did Anderson hit him in the head like Warner did to Root? The allegation as I understand it is that Jadeja approached him to complain about his sledging and Anderson pushed him away. Handbags. Handbags indeed, but that's what a Level Three charge applies to. This is another of those cases where neither side comes out with much credit. Not India, for pursuing a case so doggedly, when the reported incident was so minor but with such severe repercussions, and certainly not the ECB who have attempted, very unsuccessfully, to put a spin on the presentation of the story. There's a problem here in the framing of the regulations, in that this would appear, on the basis of the information that has been released so far, to be the sort of issue that the Match Referee is there to sort out, to prevent the development of ill-will particularly at the start of the series. Unfortunately Level Three takes it straight out of the hands of the Referee and into the ambit of the ICC...and once you start flying in lawyers from Dubai you know that mountains are going to be made out of molehills. I yearn for the days when the two Managers would get together and agree to tear strips off their respective players and tell them not to be so bloody childish. Too much history, too much money, too much regulation has ensured that cannot now happen, and the losers are the spectators who want to see Anderson bowling and Jadeja doing whatever Jadeja is supposed to do, not being reduced to actors in a second-rate courtroom drama. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 7:59:21 GMT
Did Anderson hit him in the head like Warner did to Root? The allegation as I understand it is that Jadeja approached him to complain about his sledging and Anderson pushed him away. Handbags. You obviously have inside information, wally! But I really hope your info is wrong because if Anderson did push him away then he will be banned; you cannot put your hands on an opposing player and escape sanction. The Root v Warner bout was different as it happened away from any match and so was dealt with by CA not the ICC. The CA disciplinary panel banned Warner from the Champions Trophy for his action, of course. Three witnesses have given sworn affidavits to the ICC, and if they all confirm your information that Anderson did put his hands on Jadeja, then he will pay a high price. But I suggest we wait and see what the legal process decides before passing instant judgements from afar. My objection is not to whatever Anderson may have done - unlike you I have no inside account - but to the ECB's ill-considered response. One had hoped that with Flower gone, a new, less arrogant attitude would prevail. But the first few months of the Downton/Moores era have so far suggested that little has changed. Cricinfo is interesting on what the latest incident tells us about the unfortunate culture that surrounds 'Team England' :
"Maybe it is their sledging, maybe it is their media, maybe it is the perception of their hubris or maybe they are even innocent victims, but the England side is universally unpopular almost across the globe. Sri Lanka is the latest example of a team who were infuriated by their tactics.
To some extent, England may revel in such a reputation. They may claim that it unsettles their opponents and goads them into reckless moments.But there is equal evidence to suggest it goads them into career-best performances. Just consider Angelo Mathews at Headingley, George Bailey at Perth and Marlon Samuels at Trent Bridge. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that much of England's on-field behaviour is not just posturing, but self-defeating posturing."
Those wise words, perhaps surprisingly, were written by Dobell, who when he stops his own tabloid 'Cook is more mouse than Strauss' posturing, can sometimes talk much sense. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 8:31:45 GMT
Should all be handled behind closed doors. Heads banged together, shake hands and move on. But it won't and it's about POWER!
So just tell them the test is off, tour off go home.
We'll play SA, Australia, NZ, SL, WI. They'll all like to come here play in front of big crowds, earn lots!
Don't let them bully cricket. They are slowly taking over. This is one more step. Every time something similar to this happens in the future when India are playing they'll get the lawyers in. Ban the opposition players. You can bet it won't be an Indian player/official at fault.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jul 17, 2014 8:36:19 GMT
Did Anderson hit him in the head like Warner did to Root? The allegation as I understand it is that Jadeja approached him to complain about his sledging and Anderson pushed him away. Handbags. You obviously have inside information, wally! But I really hope your info is wrong because if Anderson did push him away then he will be banned; you cannot put your hands on an opposing player and escape sanction. The Root v Warner bout was different as it happened away from any match and so was dealt with by CA not the ICC. The CA disciplinary panel banned Warner from the Champions Trophy for his action, of course. Three witnesses have given sworn affidavits to the ICC, and if they all confirm your information that Anderson did put his hands on Jadeja, then he will pay a high price. But I suggest we wait and see what the legal process decides before passing instant judgements from afar. My objection is not to whatever Anderson may have done - unlike you I have no inside account - but to the ECB's ill-considered response. One had hoped that with Flower gone, a new, less arrogant attitude would prevail. But the first few months of the Downton/Moores era have so far suggested that little has changed. Cricinfo is interesting on what the latest incident tells us about the unfortunate culture that surrounds 'Team England' :
"Maybe it is their sledging, maybe it is their media, maybe it is the perception of their hubris or maybe they are even innocent victims, but the England side is universally unpopular almost across the globe. Sri Lanka is the latest example of a team who were infuriated by their tactics.
To some extent, England may revel in such a reputation. They may claim that it unsettles their opponents and goads them into reckless moments.But there is equal evidence to suggest it goads them into career-best performances. Just consider Angelo Mathews at Headingley, George Bailey at Perth and Marlon Samuels at Trent Bridge. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that much of England's on-field behaviour is not just posturing, but self-defeating posturing."
Those wise words, perhaps surprisingly, were written by Dobell, who when he stops his own tabloid 'Cook is more mouse than Strauss' posturing, can sometimes talk much sense. Blimey, even Dobell takes precedence over the ECB.  I'm inclined to agree with his sentiments, though. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jul 17, 2014 9:15:13 GMT
Handbags, handbags and more handbags. Anderson is renowned for being the primary England sledger. England are
being Australia and India grossly overact. What would have happened if Anderson had said to Jadeja, "Get ready for a
broken f***ing arm." A major National incident between the two countries?
Sorry to quote the cliche but "it's political correctness gone mad!" Grow up India. This is sport. Sometimes it gets
a bit rough and tumble out there on the pitch.
|
|
|
|
Post by flashblade on Jul 17, 2014 9:29:25 GMT
Handbags, handbags and more handbags. Anderson is renowned for being the primary England sledger. England are being Australia and India grossly overact. What would have happened if Anderson had said to Jadeja, "Get ready for a broken f***ing arm." A major National incident between the two countries? Sorry to quote the cliche but "it's political correctness gone mad!" Grow up India. This is sport. Sometimes it gets a bit rough and tumble out there on the pitch. Agreed, fluffy. India are trying hard to reinforce their superiority complex in the cricket world. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 9:33:08 GMT
Don't think it has got anything to do with political correctness. There is a code that says you cannot put your hands on another player.If it was breached, the player concerned must pay the penalty. If he didn't touch Jadeja he will be found not guilty, we can all move on and India will be left looking pretty silly.
Meanwhile is Andrew Zzzztrauss the worst Test match commentator ever? Discussing Cook's lack of form with Gower, Botham and Warne he has just declared : "I think his priority has to be to score some runs." No kidding, Einstein? Stick to your campaign to make the 'c' word socially acceptable.
Jordan carrying the drinks again. Robinson needs to get tough and demand he is released for Horsham.
|
|
|
|
Post by hhsussex on Jul 17, 2014 9:40:10 GMT
I know I've been cynical in the past about the amount of clout Robinson, or any other County Coach, might have with Moores, but I think he really should go public and demand the release. The third Test is not until the 27th, so even if he is needed for that game, he will have 3 days to rest after the Warwicks game. He would also have the beenefit of being match-fit, not slowly atrophying by spending his summer as a hghl-paid net bowler, with all the artificiality and lack of match awareness that goes with it. |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jul 17, 2014 10:16:16 GMT
bm,
Don't think it has got anything to do with political correctness.
Sorry to sound pedantic but to me, saying to someone, "Get ready for a
broken f***ing arm..." is far more abusive and damaging than being
physically pushed on the shoulder by an opponent.
When teams are playing one another so much and during such a short
period of time, they must end up loathing the sight of each other, anyway,
which at least can lead to some emotionally charged cricket.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 10:23:55 GMT
Sorry to sound pedantic but to me, saying to someone, "Get ready for a broken f***ing arm..." is far more abusive and damaging than being physically pushed on the shoulder by an opponent. Well you can argue that the code should apply equally to abusive words and to manifestations of physical aggression. But are you saying that words should be punished with the same zero-tolerance that covers physical argy-bargy? Or that players pushing each other about should be dealt with as leniently as sledging? |
|
|
|
Post by Wicked Cricket on Jul 17, 2014 10:34:23 GMT
What I am suggesting is that harsh and strong verbal abuse can be more damaging to
an individual than a push on the shoulder. So, yes, strong verbal abuse should have
stricter penalties than minor physical brushing.
What Clarke said to Anderson in Australia is far worse than what Anderson allegedly
did to Jadeja. Clarke was fined 20% of his match fee which seemed appropriate. Anderson
should be let off with a caution if he's found guilty.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 17, 2014 11:24:39 GMT
What I am suggesting is that harsh and strong verbal abuse can be more damaging to an individual than a push on the shoulder. So, yes, strong verbal abuse should have stricter penalties than minor physical brushing. What Clarke said to Anderson in Australia is far worse than what Anderson allegedly did to Jadeja. Clarke was fined 20% of his match fee which seemed appropriate. Anderson should be let off with a caution if he's found guilty. As it is a level three charge I don't think the code has provision for such a "let off". If Anderson was stupid enough to lay hands on Jadeja and the ICC's juidicial commissioner upholds the charge that he did, there is a set tariff and that involves a ban. The code seems to be based - not unreasonably in my vew - on the old playground dictum that 'sticks and stones may break my bones but words can never hurt me'. |
|
