If any of you gents want to explain to us the game fixing scandal — for dummies — do, do.
The Pakistanis have been the worst cheaters in the cricket scene for as long I can remember. They are the reason we have “neutral umpires” now; because the Pakistani ones cheated. Before that the games played in Australia were umpired (refereed) by Australian umpires and the games played in England were umpired by English umpires, etc. And that gentleman’s system worked quite well – except for the Pakistanis who grossly favoured their own team. So instead of kicking the Pakistanis out until they cleared the cheats out the whole system was changed. Now the ICC is the cricket equivalent of the UN – run by the lowest and the worst. No wonder they wouldn’t even consider having John Howard as President.
Hmm. Australia won the 1958-59 series in Australia with a fast bowling attack that either threw the ball (Meckiff) or else overstepped the bowling mark to a remarkable degree, while throwing the occasional ball (Rorke). Then in 70-71 Ray Illingworth (a great Yorkshireman!) won the Ashes without being awarded a single LBW in the whole series by the Austrralian umpires (who were probably still sore about their great-great-great-great-great grandparents being transported, or some such). Being English, of course, it wasn’t the sort of thing we ever remarked on. We’d learned our lesson over Bodyline.
That said, the Paks have had a terrible reputation for a) cheating and b) accusing the opposition of cheating. Four years ago they forfeited a match when accused of tampering withthe ball illegally, and then went to the ICC (a body about which Brett is far too polite) to get the result changed to a draw. The ICC is of course the body that changed the laws governing what constitutues a legal delivery in order to accommodate Sri Lanka, India’s faithful ally at the ICC.
This piece gives a decent account of why the Paks are so easy to bribe/coerce etc.
Having read that, I can’t see there’s too much point in carrying on playing them.
As I said, it worked out pretty well. Actually the stats show teams visiting Australia in the former era were about even in the decisions (number of pro and con judgment calls by the umpire) with the Australian team (perhaps we made an exception for the Poms), but teams visiting England were actually favoured by the English umpires over the home team. So there’s your problem – you’re too nice.
Two of the best English umpires I ever saw were in fact Australians – Cec Pepper and Bill Alley. You always knew precisely where you stood with them. So Aussies can umpire – if only in England!
Pepper had of course been stitched up by Bradman after questioning a decision – cost him his Test career.
The English umpires knew the English players much better than they knew the tourists, and were aware of who walked, who didn’t, who tried it on. Presumably this informed their decision-making.
The English umpires knew the English players much better than they knew the tourists, and were aware of who walked, who didn’t, who tried it on.
Too late to fix, it’s hopeless.
You wouldn’t want to have tried to fix Bill Alley or Cec Pepper. They’d have fixed you first! Tough guys, but people liked them.
Never too late, Half! Imagine in baseball if a foul tip resulted in a batter being called out, caught (as per a normal foul ball that is caught). Now imagine in this situation that a batter foul tips the ball but the umpire and catcher don’t realize the batter has hit it; only the batter does. There would be two types of batter: Those very honest types who “walk” because they know they are out, and those who keep batting, because they know the umpire didn’t pick it up.
Well why didn’t Red say it in English then?
So lemme see if I have this correct. If I know a player has tried it on and kept batting, I would be fully justified in smiting said player with a Milwall Brick after the match?
He did say it in English! Just not American.
On Red’s point, whenever Tony Greig (South African, former captain of England (!)) and Bill Lawry (former Australian captain) are together commentating on a match, Greig never fails to mention that Bill Lawry was never given out LBW in Australia. Bill protests: “It’s all about technique, Tony. Good technique”. Greig just says it again more slowly: “Never. Given. Out. LBW. In. Australia”.
Well, I wouldn’t worry too much. I’m acclimated to Baseball — an aptly named sport.
Spitball, Cut ball, dirtball, mudball, highhardone, nut cutter and from the Sally League (of course) the legendary pissball. In my yut I’ve thrown 5 of the above. I could never abide chewing tobaccco and I have a shy bladder.
Problem with baseball is that they use more than one ball in a game, so you can’t really use the surface-altering techniques which help make the game such fun – though if the cutball is what it sounds like it shows a degree of enterprise….
Ever try a knuckleball, Half? Jim Bouton was a minor hero of mine, even if he didn’t do much for Mickey Mantle’s public image.
I never thru a knuckler in a game. I played with it (everyone does) but couldn’t bring myself to trust it within 3 feet. Bouton sounded like a fun guy, so does the Mick. Mickey assumed he was going to die young, he had a genetic heart problem of some sort. If I’d known I was going to live so long, I’d have taken better care of myself.
*blinks* *resolves to devote more time to cricket scandals*
That’s quite an article (the Telegraph one from Red). Basically then, Brett’s right, and they should kick the country out till they clean up their act. Combined with Red’s Italian carabinieri nephew-in-law with the knicker-elastic-snapping voice where they move the officers (or cricket players) to a different part of the country (or globe) where they can’t be corrupted by their (inevitably) corrupt family members. Ahh, Italy (Pakistan).
On a technical point, it’s the Polizia di Stato that gets moved, rather than the carabinieri. Though both have wonderful uniforms.
© 2008 ninme · Wordpress