Commonwealth Bank Series (Australia, India, Sri Lanka)

[SaiSrini]

why they settled all day night matches,when they know its gonna raining all the time?
if both match started 10 am aus time then they suppose to finish it before entry of unpleasent rain???
they should think this all when they arrenging shedule?we are still waiting for opening match of the serise???dammmn.

There are some day games in this series too

Plus, day/night games are easier on the working population who can catch at least a single innings without missing work. With the ODI's and T20's having commercial requirements, you need to allow the working population a chance to watch part of the game. Thats why day/night games will be much more popular than day games and more preferred too

 

[karnog]

Rohit Sharma deserves a harsher punishment in my opinion. Sure he was wrongly given out but there's nothing you can do about it. Just accept it and move on... to me Sharma showed an ugly side to his character.

 

[.Mob]

I agree, ban him and let Tiwary play.

 

[Harrypotter_fan]

Oh god please stop. If that was Ponting you'd be calling for a life ban, and 10% is a joke. Should be at least 40%.

By the way...

Australia may have all the talent in the world, but definitely not the talent of sportsmanship. Ricky Ponting and his team are CHEATS. How can Ponting deny that he had not grounded the catch he had claimed (Dhoni). Gilchrist and Symonds knew Dravid was not out, but still appealed as if there was no way he was out. How can everyone take Symond's and Ponting's word on Harbhajan being racist? Clarke was the man who did not walk even when he edged to 1st slpip, how can his word be taken for claiming a catch?

Australia are no longer 'The Invincibles' in my eyes (I know it doesn't matter what is in my eyes). The umpiring has been biased. I know all the aussies will be flaming me. Heck! I don't even care if I get banned for a year on PC. This is utter disrespect towards India. I don't want the tour to go on.

AUSTRALIA ARE BAD LOSERS. India played very well and deserved to win, but cricket has come to such a stage that Australia have to win, even if umpires have to act like Gods.

If I were Kumble I wouldn't be able to stand within a 5 feet radius around any australian player.

ONLY ONE SIDE IS PLAYING IN THE SPIRIT OF THE GAME.

Keep up the great posting.

I reckon something must be done by the ICC so that players who have already got the bad side of umpiring do not suffer. That's all. And I would not have asked for a life ban if it was Ponting. I admit that I brought it up because the player was an Indian. But if it was an Aussie I probably wouldn't have posted anything.

Anyways, I apologize if any part of the way back post you have quoted has hurt you and any other member.

 

[Animator!]

I don't think Rohit desevred the fine.
If Micheal Clarke does not walk when he edges the ball to first slip and gets away with it,I see no reason as to why Rohit Sharma should have been fined.

Bout the umpires being fined-i don't buy it.

We've been over this time and time again, and you still don't get it. Michael Clarke stood there, and was oviously out, because it wasnt a contensious catch, he stood there because he was disappointed. He was showing dissent because you cannot show dissent when you are quite clearly out in that fashion. He had failed a lot at that point in the series and was clearly very upset with his performance and so he was disappointed.

Whereas as horribly poor the decision Rohit got was, it was one that had to physically be given out, i.e It wasn't like Clarke's where it was an obvious edge at middle height into a slip fielder who took it cleanly. Rohit's was one that was contencious and so staying there, and shaking his head at the umpire are a clear sign that he wasn't happy with the decision, something you are not allowed to show as it is against the rules on the grounds of dissent.

 

[KBC]

Weird fact is that only india got to play on the pitches of the brisbane. Interestingly, Australia, Sri Lanka Haven't batted much and quite didn't get enough settlement on the pitch. India would like to take their advantage and score sum of runs in their upcoming matches and bowl well?, They are on top soon.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

I agree, ban him and let Tiwary play.

don't say that,they both are good and they both gonna get their chance.
Anyway i think Rohit sound more mature than Tiwary even in domestics.

 

[icyman]

We've been over this time and time again, and you still don't get it. Michael Clarke stood there, and was oviously out, because it wasnt a contensious catch, he stood there because he was disappointed. He was showing dissent because you cannot show dissent when you are quite clearly out in that fashion. He had failed a lot at that point in the series and was clearly very upset with his performance and so he was disappointed.

The highlighted statement makes no sense.


The point is Micheal Clarke showed dissent-but did not get fined.
then why on earth fine Rohit ?
So,if a person fails in 5 innings he is allowed to show dissent % get away with it ? Sourav Ganguly should never ever have been fined then.
I agree that it is only 10 %,but it may go on to porve that the Aussies have always been spared by the ICC.

 

[.Mob]

Not really, Tiwary carried Bengal all the way to the finals and he has played huge innings plenty of times, sounds pretty mature to me.

Sharma's first class average from 29 innings is 37, while Tiwary averages at 54 from 35 innings. Plus he was made captain of his state despite having the experienced head of Deep Dasgupta round, does that say something? Yes it does.

No one can say who is better at this stage, but I think Tiwary has a more mature head on him, you can't blame him for being overwhelmed by the best bowler in the world today.

Icyman - Rohit deserved a fine, end of. Clarke waited for a decision, Rohit got one but stayed at the crease looking at the umpire, c'mon, open your eyes.

 

[icyman]

Icyman - Rohit deserved a fine, end of. Clarke waited for a decision, Rohit got one but stayed at the crease looking at the umpire, c'mon, open your eyes.

Ok,but when you edge to first slip and see that it is taken cleanly,obviously you will walk.

Another question for you-If any Indian player did the same thing,would he get away with the fine ?

 

[.Mob]

Another question for you-If any Indian player did the same thing,would he get away with the fine ?

Yes he would, why are you being so biased, the ball went behind him and he waited for a decision, you cannot compare that to someone waiting even after being given out.

Rohit should learn a lesson from Rahul Dravid, he walked off even when he got a shocker (and his wicket was way more important), that is how to behave on a pitch.

 

[vaibhav mehta]

Yes he would, why are you being so biased, the ball went behind him and he waited for a decision, you cannot compare that to someone waiting even after being given out.

Rohit should learn a lesson from Rahul Dravid, he walked off even when he got a shocker (and his wicket was way more important), that is how to behave on a pitch.

R dravid played 333 ODI and its still early days for Rohit.means one failure hurts Rohit more than that to dravid...because when selector will get paper and pen for ind vs saf serise they won't count this type of errors they will look only runs made by players...
You can't compare behaviour of these young players with Sachin or Dravid.Mcgrath tried lot to hear from Sachin on ground but he never opened his mouth so young players trying to be more passionable...best example is Sreesanth as his behaviour never oriented towards games n he still not took 100 wickets neithere in ODI nor in TESTS...

 

[.Mob]

R dravid played 333 ODI and its still early days for Rohit.means one failure hurts Rohit more than that to dravid...because when selector will get paper and pen for ind vs saf serise they won't count this type of errors they will look only runs made by players...

So? It still doesn't condone what he did, I was simply saying he should take Dravid as a role model, more so because it is early days for him.

 

[Animator!]

The highlighted statement makes no sense.


The point is Micheal Clarke showed dissent-but did not get fined.
then why on earth fine Rohit ?
So,if a person fails in 5 innings he is allowed to show dissent % get away with it ? Sourav Ganguly should never ever have been fined then.
I agree that it is only 10 %,but it may go on to porve that the Aussies have always been spared by the ICC.

Yes, it does.

Michael Clarke was obviously out, it was a clear catch, yes? And so it wasn't a contencious decision like Caught behind and LBW's etc etc are. He didn't require the umpire to actually give him out to kno's out. He stayed in disappointment at getting out and not as a sign that he was unhappy wiyth the decision. Whereas Rohit clearly did.

 

[sohum]

The highlighted statement makes no sense.


The point is Micheal Clarke showed dissent-but did not get fined.
then why on earth fine Rohit ?
So,if a person fails in 5 innings he is allowed to show dissent % get away with it ? Sourav Ganguly should never ever have been fined then.
I agree that it is only 10 %,but it may go on to porve that the Aussies have always been spared by the ICC.

Clarke wasn't showing dissent. He was just hoping that the near-blind and near-deaf umpires hadn't seen or heard his thick edge. Sharma was showing dissent because the umpire had given him out yet he took time to leave. Of course, it was only his sixth ODI game, so it was a bit harsh.