General Cricket discussion

General Cricket discussion Aug 22, 2019 5:48:57 GMT Carl LaFong likes this

Quote

Post by weststigersbob on Aug 22, 2019 5:48:57 GMT

Aug 21, 2019 20:18:38 GMT hoskotafe3 said:

I didn't really follow Monkeygate as I was working at a Chennai orpganage at the time. First I heard of it was when I travelled to Kumbakonam for Pongal with my friend Pramodh (I would later propose to my second wife at his wedding) who said something to me along the lines of "don't talk about the cricket today. Something bad happened. People are angry with Australians."

By the time I got home the deaths of first Clinton Grybas and then Heath Ledger had knocked it out of the news cycle. When I watched highlights of the game, what struck me was that the luckiest two people in the world were Steve Bucknor and Marc Benson that people were talking about monkeys instead of them. What a fucking wretched performance from those two. Not only did they make some shocking decisions against both teams, but their behaviour at many times enflamed the situation.

I think Rohan's attitude on Murali can be explained by two things. 1) Aussies never cheat and 2) Murali's main rival was a Victorian. Murali's a cheat (in spite of sports science saying otherwise) is a a catch-all argument why Warne must be better. I don't know if you remember him basically saying Merv Hughes had to carry that bum McDermott around his whole career. Hughes is Victorian, Billy wasn't.

Benson and Bucknor were atrocious. How Bucknor ever stood again in an international match I will never know. You are right they made it worse, but what really inflamed the situation was that because they got so many wrong there were accusations about the Australians “cheating”. Appealing for decisions that only look sort of out has been happening since the first umpire stood in a game of cricket 500 years ago. They same day a controversial call was made by the same umpire. In no way is it cheating. That being said, this game solidified in many non-Australian minds that Australia would stoop to any level they liked to win, blatantly cheated and the entire country was ripe for torrents of racial abuse. It’s not our fault Bucknor got so many wrong. In fact, quite a few went against Australia. Didn’t matter.
What really pissed me off was the blatant “holier than thou” bullshit arguments that followed (and subsequently resurrected during ‘sandpapergate’). Are Australians the only team excessively appealing? No. Are Australians the only team whose crowds are racist ? No. Are Australians the only team that claims catches that aren’t ? No. Are Australians they only team who sledge ? No. And yet, even reading some of the Australian press regarding it, you’d think international cricket EVERYWHERE else was “Tally Ho, Jolly good show chaps” with Pimms and Cucumber sandwiches in the afternoon. It’s complete and utter bullshit. Maybe Australia crossed a line. Maybe. They did take 3 wickets in the last over to win. But appealing is now cheating, you can’t celebrate a win, and a black man being called a monkey isn’t racist ? Gimme a break.

I can sort of see Rohan’s point regarding Murali. I’m an unabashed Warne fan. Have been since 1990. Probably because he reminded me of me (Chubby blond leg spinner). But that fact is completely reconciled from my opinions on Murali. I am still convinced that in 1996 when Darryl Hair FIRST called Murali on Boxing Day, Murali was chucking. As his arm swings around it clearly straightened upwards. The action is obvious - point your bent elbow up, with your hand on your shoulder. Then, unbend your elbow as you raise your hand. This is what Murali was doing. Where the facts and the lies started to blur was (shocking, I know) when the ICC bungled the biometric testing and the subsequent rule changes, and prior to that, essentially allowing all and sundry to accuse Australia of calling Murali a chucker for <insert whatever reason you like>. The most ridiculous argument of all came from Tony Grieg, who insisted that because Murali couldn’t fully straighten his arm, he couldn’t bend his elbow at all, and therefore couldn’t possibly chuck and Hair called him without any evidence and it was because Australia didn’t like the little Sri Lunkuns.
Amazingly, when Murali was tested, he passed. Knowing for months prior that you are going to be tested and modifying your action accordingly will do that. Where I actually praise Murali is that he was still just as good after he changed. The wanker Ross Emerson called him again, after he previously said if he was standing in a match where Murali bowled, he would. I think Warne was the batter bowler due to 3 reasons. 1) He didn’t get to play half his tests in Sri Lanka. Warne would’ve taken 1000 wickets otherwise. 2) He had McGrath, Gillespie, Lee, Kasprowicz and Bichel taking wickets off him at the other end. Murali had Vaas. 3) Murali took 120 odd wickets against Bangladesh and Zimbabwe. Warne took 17. In 3 tests.

And finally, a brief note on Merv Hughes. There were plenty of cricket types floating around NSW who couldn’t stand him. They genuinely believe Hughes took the place of Mike Whitney in the Test side for years. The rivalry between states in Australian Cricket sometimes is hilarious. The “anti-Victoria, pro-NSW, baggy blue plus a baggy green in a paper bag” bullshit for years was trundled out by David Hookes. A South Australian. And the champions of the “Queensland batsmen can’t get a go” crowd - Border, Chappell, Thompson and Richards. NSW, SA, NSW and RSA. Not a Queenslander amongst them.