Wednesday, June 25, 2008

What does it all mean?

I’m very confused by this Elliott run-out business today (and all for a bloody one-day international, can you imagine?). My moral/ethical compass is very confused these days. Can someone get back to me on whether this action was:

  1. A “cowardly and despicable” act indicative of the general Decline of Western Civilization, the Ascendancy of the Eastern Hordes, the Rise of the Global South, the decline of the Global North, the Supremacy of the Indian Premier League and the Medellin Cartel.
  2. A “hard-but-fair” cricketing practice and therefore to be used only by Australian, South African or English players c.f recent culture wars over sledging, umpire-hassling, inquiring into rival’s maternal provenance, sibling promiscuity, standing ground on nicking, appealing when not out, asking for bump ball catch, mimicking accents, requesting boxing duels etc
  3. An ordinarily despicable, but condoned for the time being act because it’s done by an England captain c.f Mike Atherton ball massage incident (also c.f cricket history in general, but in particular see four-fast-bowler theory and Bodyline).
  4. Not problematic because done to a member of a weak cricketing side c.f cricket history in general
  5. Horrendous because it provides clear evidence that the BCCI has taken over the game. [sorry, this is already taken care of by point 1 above]


Blogger Abhishek Jain said...

Samir, when you say for a bloody ODI, do you mean that this is pardonable in a Test match? :)

Anyways, you might remember Collingwood was furious in Oval last year when he was rightly given out by 3rd umpire when the umpire asked for the replay only after the big screen showed the replay.

So, I would rather say, players have a pattern. Some people never walk (Symonds), some people always appeal (Aussies) and some people always choose the favorable decision.

I guess, 'Hard but Fair' is allowed only to Eng and Aus because, unfortunately, they have better respected and more widely-read journalists. Something not discussed by the right people is not really an issue!

Just wondering, is there a role for Referee to play here (though I must admit I am not a big fan).

4:29 PM  
Blogger Samir Chopra said...

Abhishek: I would have considered it pardonable in a World Cup final with one ball to go.

But seriously, yes, there are patterns. Collingwood is trying hard to a tough, hard-nosed English captain - like Nasser and Jardine for instance. I'm not sure he can pull it off without looking silly.

4:44 PM  
Blogger Jrod said...

How did Murali get run out against New Zealand again, wasn't going to cheer on his partner for making a hundred was it?

9:54 PM  
Blogger Q said...

It happens, its cricket. Theres nothing wrong with it.

I agree with Uncle J.

5:28 AM  
Blogger Samir Chopra said...

I find it utterly unsurprising, Q and Jrod, that this business was initiated by a mediocre captain of a mediocre side in a one-day international. A truly excellent side wouldn't bother.

9:03 AM  
Blogger Indian Cricket said...

Hey thanks like a true cricket lower. I would like to contribute to your love by sharing which has issues of your interest.

3:06 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home