NZ v SA Test Series
-
@Chris-B Are you saying he should never be selected?
The guy was not guilty.
-
@Duluth I think it's complete madness to select him a couple of weeks after his rape re-trial finished.
It will be more than the media reacting and they are running a business - they might as well sack their PR department.
@Hooroo Maybe in a couple of years, when he's slipped out of the immediate public consciousness.
-
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner Good luck with that.
NZ Cricket have painted a big red nose on their faces and said "punch me".
They've asked and they will surely receive.
I don't understand the logic of anyone having a problem with an innocent man being selected.
Is he supposed to be punished for being accused of rape? -
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Duluth I think it's complete madness to select him a couple of weeks after his rape re-trial finished.
It will be more than the media reacting and they are running a business - they might as well sack their PR department.
@Hooroo Maybe in a couple of years, when he's slipped out of the immediate public consciousness.
by which time his career might well be over or well past his best or had a career ending injury, honestly, I don't think there is any right time, cant let the PC peeps or media dictate how you select your team, there will always be those that will bring it up anyway, I mean remember Roger Randle.
-
@Gunner said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner Good luck with that.
NZ Cricket have painted a big red nose on their faces and said "punch me".
They've asked and they will surely receive.
I don't understand the logic of anyone having a problem with an innocent man being selected.
Is he supposed to be punished for being accused of rape?He's not innocent - he's not guilty - and it took two goes to get that verdict.
But that is irrelevant to my point.
NZ Cricket is running a business and they have just bought themselves a shitstorm of negative publicity. It is, in my view, a completely idiotic decision by the organization.
-
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner Good luck with that.
NZ Cricket have painted a big red nose on their faces and said "punch me".
They've asked and they will surely receive.
I don't understand the logic of anyone having a problem with an innocent man being selected.
Is he supposed to be punished for being accused of rape?He's not innocent - he's not guilty - and it took two goes to get that verdict.
But that is irrelevant to my point.
NZ Cricket is running a business and they have just bought themselves a shitstorm of negative publicity. It is, in my view, a completely idiotic decision by the organization.
He is innocent of the charges laid against him. Don't twist what didn't happen.
That is like saying anyone found not guilty is not innocent but not guilty as well.
-
@Chris-B. if not for Ferguson, Boult & Southee being injured, I don't think he'd of been called in, not that what the media are gonna say should have a bearing, as you say they are running a business, they need to win games, he is a cricketer in NZ like all the others, and the best of a bunch that gives them a shot at winning the test, which is the goal of the business
-
@Hooroo said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Gunner Good luck with that.
He is innocent of the charges laid against him. Don't twist what didn't happen.
That is like saying anyone found not guilty is not innocent but not guilty as well.
Actually your second point is correct in a legal sense. Not guilty is not the same as innocent. But, it's the best you can get from the court - roughly, that the case couldn't be proven against you.
-
@Chris-B I take your point, from a PR side of things this could blow up, especially with all the nonsense about a "rape culture" in the media lately, but at the end of the day he got accused of something that could not be proved in court. You can't ruin someone's career because of accusations alone. I'm comfortable with their decision to select him. If he can take a stack of wickets that won't hurt...
-
@No-Quarter Well, at least if the shitstorm arrives, they've got David White to handle it all for them, so nothing's going wrong there.
I wonder - after his experiences in 2016 - whether Steve Tew would have allowed this?
-
Appeasing the PC police never ends well. The people who aren't happy with Kuggeleijn being picked now, won't be happy in a year's time either. Chris you seem to be arguing that the people who don't want Kuggeleijn to be selected because of the rape trial are being irrational but we should listen to them anyway.
-
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
He's not innocent - he's not guilty - and it took two goes to get that verdict.
By the same token he was tried twice and both times they failed to get a guilty verdict.
Absolutely buy that a media shitstorm is going to ensue, but at the end of the day the national team should be selected on merit - it is a representative side. Being cleared on all charges this should be available for selection.
-
@rotated said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
He's not innocent - he's not guilty - and it took two goes to get that verdict.
Being cleared on all charges this should be available for selection.
So if Cairnsie was still in his hey-day, would you be happy if he was picked?
-
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@rotated said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
He's not innocent - he's not guilty - and it took two goes to get that verdict.
Being cleared on all charges this should be available for selection.
So if Cairnsie was still in his hey-day, would you be happy if he was picked?
Touché
-
@Chris-B. said in NZ v SA Test Series:
@hydro11 I don't think I've expressed a view on their rationality one way or the other.
I assumed so because you haven't expressed any personal opposition to Kuggeleijn. The only reason you have given that he shouldn't be picked is because it gives NZC bad PR.
