Cricket 2018/19
-
@barbarian said in Cricket 2018/19:
I don't know how to feel. A part of me is obviously appalled, but a small part of me is a little bit impressed.
As an Aussie, I've been brought up with the firm belief that cricket is not about making friends. This action is so low, so dirty, so disgusting, that I can't help but tip my hat to him.
Why is it on him to give this bloke a tonne?
If you're going to be a cnut, go all out. And throwing the ball for six is really an amazing response to the situation.
It's actually pretty alpha. A bowler in a team that failed to defend, has somehow taken the prime spot.
Cricket is an evil game.
-
-
@barbarian said in Cricket 2018/19:
Not to mention the act of throwing the ball for 6, from the pitch, is pretty impressive. Not sure my arm would be able to accomplish that.
beta
-
I've mentioned before that I once instructed a bowler to bowl 4 wides to end a game and in doing so deny a batsman his century.
2 Indian teams, I'm the only non Indian. Batting team needed about 15 runs for an easy win. Batsman needed 15 runs for his ton.
All good till the non century batsman decided not to take any runs, and thus deny the other guy his ton.
This went on for 3 or 4 overs. We just wanted to go home for a few curries.
With 4 to win and 4 for the ton I cracked the shits and whispered for our bowler to bowl 4 wides. He nearly hit square leg ump!.I ostensibly did the same as ol mate the javelin thrower and have no real regrets.
Let social justice and a cold shoulder be the punishment and deterrent not to repeat this behaviour. Just like we did before screaming SJWs.
-
@siam said in Cricket 2018/19:
I've mentioned before that I once instructed a bowler to bowl 4 wides to end a game and in doing so deny a batsman his century.
2 Indian teams, I'm the only non Indian. Batting team needed about 15 runs for an easy win. Batsman needed 15 runs for his ton.
All good till the non century batsman decided not to take any runs, and thus deny the other guy his ton.
This went on for 3 or 4 overs. We just wanted to go home for a few curries.
With 4 to win and 4 for the ton I cracked the shits and whispered for our bowler to bowl 4 wides. He nearly hit square leg ump!.I ostensibly did the same as ol mate the javelin thrower and have no real regrets.
Let social justice and a cold shoulder be the punishment and deterrent not to repeat this behaviour. Just like we did before screaming SJWs.
cricket is a game for psychopaths
-
@barbarian said in Cricket 2018/19:
Not to mention the act of throwing the ball for 6, from the pitch, is pretty impressive. Not sure my arm would be able to accomplish that.
Unless of course you’re playing on a NZ ground....
-
Ben Stokes trial is on at the moment, whats coming out so far is ... interesting.
At the moment it looks like the violence only as it was homophobes claim which was portrayed was complete and utter horse shit. Still plenty to go in it though.
-
Gary Stead is the Black Caps coach.
-
@baron-silas-greenback Interesting line in the article - both went for the NSW job. Hmmmm.
-
@baron-silas-greenback said in Cricket 2018/19:
Gary Stead is the Black Caps coach.
The selection system, with the coach having the right of veto alongside Larsen, is expected to continue. Stead's first assignment in charge will be the tour of the United Arab Emirates against Pakistan starting in late October, with squads already chosen by Hesson and Larsen.
Sounds like a classic NZC move.
Two and a half months simply wouldn't be enough time for the incoming coach to meet with Larsen and select a squad.
-
@majorrage said in Cricket 2018/19:
Ben Stokes trial is on at the moment, whats coming out so far is ... interesting.
At the moment it looks like the violence only as it was homophobes claim which was portrayed was complete and utter horse shit. Still plenty to go in it though.
So, he's gotten off. In translation, this means that the jury believed his drunken view of what happened, over the view of the only sober person in the area, that being the bouncer. Oh, and all the CCTV showing what looks like a legal definition of affray ( offence consisting of the fighting of one or more persons in a public place to the terror (in French: à l'effroi) of ordinary people) was obviously fake as well.
What a bullshit verdict.
On the flip side though, those saying he deserves more retribution before playing for England again seem a bit silly. He already missed an Ashes tour. Surely for an England cricketer, that's punishment enough.
-
I'm not sure the Ashes ban will be considered sufficient - basically he was suspended "indefinitely" pending a police investigation - but it wasn't a fixed suspension based on his behaviour. And then they brought him back anyway without the situation being resolved. They could have banned him for 6/12 months or life based purely on that indiscretion and then that would have been an end to it.
Still unsure why he wasn't prosecuted for assault as well as affray - given affray does require some bystanders to be majorly affected and there weren't really any.
But he will play in the 3rd test and depressingly the English fans will give him a hearty reception which will then become a thing that extends to the rest of his career - and the Barmy Army will sing songs about his heroic valour.
Contrasts with Ryder and Bracewell and their unwritten "3 strikes and you're out". Stokes has had quite a few incidents in the past and nothing to suggest there won't be another in the future.
-
an interesting take here
still reading it, but the dude writes well
-
@majorrage said in Cricket 2018/19:
On the flip side though, those saying he deserves more retribution before playing for England again seem a bit silly. He already missed an Ashes tour. Surely for an England cricketer, that's punishment enough.
Playing on that tour would have been a greater punishment.
@kiwipie said in Cricket 2018/19:
I'm not sure the Ashes ban will be considered sufficient - basically he was suspended "indefinitely" pending a police investigation - but it wasn't a fixed suspension based on his behaviour. And then they brought him back anyway without the situation being resolved. They could have banned him for 6/12 months or life based purely on that indiscretion and then that would have been an end to it.
I don't see how a potential life ban (or a 1 year ban for that matter) would be appropriate for this. If you dish out a life ban surely you are setting a precedent that will quickly become very uncomfortable.
Dumb, dangerous and certainly looks ugly on camera without any context (biggest factor in this incident relative to others). But I don't see how you could give a lifetime ban to this and not a "standard" athlete drink driving conviction.
Contrasts with Ryder and Bracewell and their unwritten "3 strikes and you're out". Stokes has had quite a few incidents in the past and nothing to suggest there won't be another in the future.
What are you counting as strikes? At the time of the incident he was vice captain of the side and held in high standing. A couple of speeding tickets and breaking curfew in 2015? Hope the Gary Stead is running NZTA history checks on the squad his first week in the job in that case.
-
@rotated said in Cricket 2018/19:
I don't see how a potential life ban (or a 1 year ban for that matter) would be appropriate for this. If you dish out a life ban surely you are setting a precedent that will quickly become very uncomfortable.
Dumb, dangerous and certainly looks ugly on camera without any context (biggest factor in this incident relative to others). But I don't see how you could give a lifetime ban to this and not a "standard" athlete drink driving conviction.Obviously I wasn't stating he should get a life ban - obviously. I would say it goes without saying but obviously it doesn't.
If you can get a 1 year ban for presiding over ball tampering (not actually tampering) when previous offences have been a 1 game ban or less then what's your point on precedents?
-
@nzzp said in Cricket 2018/19:
an interesting take here
still reading it, but the dude writes well
That was informative - read it earlier on.
-
@kiwipie important to note that Sutherland and cricket Aus came up with the 1 year ban in a virtue signalling context. I think the ICC ruled 2 match suspension which seemed pretty consistent with similar rulings.
Just pointing out that the sandpaper incident doesn't necessarily provide a suitable precedent, as you alluded to
Personally I think the court ruling and historic loss of income or status is enough justice. It was just a fight outside a nightclub, similar to thousands of such incidents every weekend.
-
Hahaha who is this Bumrah fluffybunny bowling for India??
It's the most B-Grade club action i have ever seen
Walk walk skip skip round arm medium pace around the wicket
I'm surprised he's not bowling in black Nike runners
Stuff
The Secret Barrister
