Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
Cricket Thread
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Every Time Ref" data-source="post: 951207" data-attributes="member: 71826"><p>I do think there's an important distinction between deliberately maiming someone and cheating at a sport though. I'll happily boo Callum Clarke to the end if time because he won't have served his time until he goes to prison for it, frankly.</p><p></p><p>To be honest, re sandpapergate, I'm in the fairly unpopular camp that it was a bit of an overreaction, I don't for a moment think they're unique in doing it, I think there have been constant scandals over the years and it's the tip of the iceberg in terms of what's going on. I refuse to judge Atherton, Tendulkar, whoever else in any lasting way, and I'm not going to judge these guys either. Well, I will judge David Warner for generally being a piece of **** but that's a separate thing. I've got a lot of respect for Steve Smith as a player and sandpaper isn't going to change that for me.</p><p></p><p>Altering the condition of the ball is way less of a big deal than is made of it in the cricketing world in my opinion. It's based on a totally subjective judgement that making the ball shinier = good, making the ball rougher = bad and I think it's ridiculous how much hand wringing is attached to it.</p><p></p><p>I accept I'm in a minority. Full disclosure, I am (or was) a fast bowler, and have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about the constant trend over the last couple of decades towards favouring the batsmen more and more (I switched on a T20 last night and the boundaries were ******* ludicrous!). Frankly if I had it my way, ball tampering would be legal ...</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Every Time Ref, post: 951207, member: 71826"] I do think there’s an important distinction between deliberately maiming someone and cheating at a sport though. I’ll happily boo Callum Clarke to the end if time because he won’t have served his time until he goes to prison for it, frankly. To be honest, re sandpapergate, I’m in the fairly unpopular camp that it was a bit of an overreaction, I don’t for a moment think they’re unique in doing it, I think there have been constant scandals over the years and it’s the tip of the iceberg in terms of what’s going on. I refuse to judge Atherton, Tendulkar, whoever else in any lasting way, and I’m not going to judge these guys either. Well, I will judge David Warner for generally being a piece of **** but that’s a separate thing. I’ve got a lot of respect for Steve Smith as a player and sandpaper isn’t going to change that for me. Altering the condition of the ball is way less of a big deal than is made of it in the cricketing world in my opinion. It’s based on a totally subjective judgement that making the ball shinier = good, making the ball rougher = bad and I think it’s ridiculous how much hand wringing is attached to it. I accept I’m in a minority. Full disclosure, I am (or was) a fast bowler, and have a bit of a bee in my bonnet about the constant trend over the last couple of decades towards favouring the batsmen more and more (I switched on a T20 last night and the boundaries were ******* ludicrous!). Frankly if I had it my way, ball tampering would be legal ... [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
Cricket Thread
Top