Showing posts with label sledging. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sledging. Show all posts

Tuesday, January 29, 2008

Indians inflict mental disintegration on Tait

In a surprising move, Shaun Tait was retired from all forms of cricket, citing physical and emotional exhaustion.

He has always had elbow problems and has undergone major surgery on his shoulder in 2005. But you wonder if the main problem isn’t line and length?

In the one match that he played in the recent Indian series, he bowled 21 overs for 92 runs and taking no wickets. He was milked like a highly promiscuous cow.

He did alright in the World Cup, taking 23 wickets, but he has always struggled at test match level. I remember the English battering him about the place a while ago, and indeed, his test match average is 60.

It is confusing that he says he is “emotionally exhaustion” when he has played so few matches at the top level. This isn’t an Andrew Strauss, “oh, it’s all too much for me”. Perhaps he thinks he’s not cut out for the “highest level”? Then again, Bret Lee also took a long time to find his feet.

No, I put it down to the Indians. Seeing as they are nasty sledgers now, it seems obvious that they deliberately mentally disintegrated him. Who’s next on their international hit-list? Their out to get us.

Tuesday, January 15, 2008

Video 1: Sledging



Ding Dong! How’s that for a post! Apologies for various errors. It’s worth sticking around to the end though. It gets exciting there.

Anyway. Sledging. It kills. Don’t do it.

Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Jelly bean bastards

A jelly bean is the centre of the cricketing world today.

Zaheer Khan claims that Kevin Pietersen threw a wee sweetie at him whilst batting. Presumably, this is after the stump-microphone picked up the “that’s a shit shot” wittism.

England claim no such action took place. Michael Vaughan said:
"The guys promised me they weren't throwing them. They were just left there at a drinks interval."

It may have indeed been a joke. By in the context of a barrage of abuse, it would be difficult to interpret this joking-but-not-joking incident as anything other than part of the pathetic intimidatory tactics that England were reduced to. I’m not surprised that Zaheer felt “insulted”.

In an obvious tit-for-tat remark, David Gravney, the English Chairman of Selectors said:

"There were some issues on both sides. You've got people bowling beamers, you've got people going across the crease."
No, not both sides: our side. Besides, these comments are a blatant attack on Sree Santh who, along with receiving a fine of 50% of his match fee for barging into Michael Vaughan, also accidentally bowled a beamer and deliberately ran over the crease.

As far as I’m concerned, this is an isolated action by one hot-headed quick. The more troubling aspect of this debacle comes from the English camp. Their organised and nasty abuse of batsmen was constant.

I’m really annoyed at England. If they were a political party, I would definitely never vote for them ever again. However, I am English, and I’m buggered if I know what to do. Maybe reclaim my Irish roots?

Anyway, this sledging business is really pissing me off. Why can’t they just bloody play cricket for Christ’s sake? Here’s Geoff Boycott:

"With verbals, I ask myself why do people carry on abusing players when they're batting. I never had it in my day and I faced some of the greatest bowlers there has ever been."
For once I agree with Geoff. Sledging hasn’t always been “part of the game”. Being “tough” does not mean tolerating abuse. It means playing hard cricket; not swearing at opponents.

What am I going to do? The England team are a collection of vindictive bastards. Support India, I suppose? They do appreciate spin bowling more…

Monday, July 30, 2007

England get a bit nasty

I criticised Australians heavily a while ago for being prats. I argued that their no-holds-barred approach to the game lay outside the spirit of the game. Whether it was effective was irrelevant, people had paid good money to see people play high quality cricket, and if a batsman’s concentration was disturbed by a verbal harassment then you are denying the public the full spectacle of test match cricket. It’s akin to cheating.

England’s behaviour on the field in this test match has been a disgrace. The conduct of Kevin Pietersen and James Anderson in particular was embarrassing and pathetic.

In the prats league, they are running neck-and-neck with the Aussies at the moment. However, unlike the Aussies, the strategy is proving ineffective.

Matt Prior attempted to defend England appalling display:

“It’s international cricket. It’s a hard game, we all want to win, so you’re going to have your banter.”

If you want to win, why don’t you just brain the opposition batsmen in the changing room? That would guarantee success. Oh no, there is some invisible threshold of acceptability defined not in the rules, but in England’s head.

Prior then reveals the truth of the matter:
“I do enjoy [sledging]. It’s part of the game and if you don’t enjoy it then you’re going to struggle. It’s never nice when it’s you batting and there’s 11 blokes around you giving you a barrage. It can be uncomfortable, obviously, but having known that as a batter as well it can definitely be used as an advantage.”
Matthew Prior is a prat.

Cricket is a sport, whereby winning and losing is determined by skill. These flaky arguments in favour of verbal abuse and mental attacks are affront to morality as much as the spirit of the game. And, as Christopher Martin-Jenkins pointed out, they are also illegal.

Indian have traditionally been seen as a “soft touch” on the field. Their batsmen are liable to be intimidated and riled easily. Probably because Indians, as people, are so polite, diplomatic, diffident and generally some of the best human beings in the world. Sadly, they’ve had to toughen up to combat this onslaught. And they did just that. Deflating the lary England bowlers with a solid batting performance.

India thoroughly deserve to win this match, just as much as England deserve to lose it.