Micheal Atherton unhappy with Nimbus & BCCI

[ronny_kingsley]

Even if they did it is fine. Why would any board want to cretae situations when guys like Atherton (who have created furore about BCCI) are around.

If Atherton found it so hard why the hell didnt he leave at that time ???? Why to "kiss and tell " after getting back home and pocketing the cheque.

Hypocrite Atherton.

 

[alfa_beta]

Agreed... Atherton was happy making money and didn't complain at that time. But as soon as he's back he's whining like a little girl. If he was so repulsed at the so called "gag" order from BCCI, he could have walked out and made a stand in support of his right to "free speech".

Even if they did it is fine. Why would any board want to cretae situations when guys like Atherton (who have created furore about BCCI) are around.

If Atherton found it so hard why the hell didnt he leave at that time ???? Why to "kiss and tell " after getting back home and pocketing the cheque.

Hypocrite Atherton.

 

[m_vaughan]

Agreed... Atherton was happy making money and didn't complain at that time. But as soon as he's back he's whining like a little girl. If he was so repulsed at the so called "gag" order from BCCI, he could have walked out and made a stand in support of his right to "free speech".

Because England were also playing, and I think all the commentators have contractual obligations.

 

[varunvgiri]

Issuing a gag order in India is plain silly....

All people do in this country is to issue silly statements and then fight over them. Especially politicians. BCCI cant stop people discussing these things as long as they have a bunch of warring politicians onboard who are ready to tell anything to the press for their slightest advantage.

 

[Sureshot]

Even if they did it is fine. Why would any board want to cretae situations when guys like Atherton (who have created furore about BCCI) are around.

If Atherton found it so hard why the hell didnt he leave at that time ???? Why to "kiss and tell " after getting back home and pocketing the cheque.

Hypocrite Atherton.

Athers made a statement on a situation that all should be worried about.

Why didn't he leave?

Never heard of contractual obligations?

I'd like to know why he's a hypocrite though.

 

[ronny_kingsley]

Athers made a statement on a situation that all should be worried about.

Why didn't he leave?

Never heard of contractual obligations?

I'd like to know why he's a hypocrite though.

Whats worrisome about it ????

What about that contractual obligation now ????????

Also dont tell me Atherton is dependent on cricket commentary for his living .

His contractual obligations are towards SKY not towards Nimbus or BCCI so he could easily have backed out or atleast didnt take his pay cheque in dissent.

Hypocrite because he changes his views as per his convenience.

 

[icyman]

His contractual obligations are towards SKY not towards Nimbus or BCCI so he could easily have backed out or atleast didnt take his pay cheque in dissent.

True,his contractual obligations are towards SKY and not to BCCI or NImbus.
However,if NImbus & BCCI do not allow SKY to produce their own feed for UK users,what will Artherton do ?
He'll have to stick to Nimbus to ensure that Britian is sufficiently represented.

 

[rituraj]

Well Artherton has always has misgivings to about BCCI & its superpower status in cricket. But people should know that this has been going on since dalmiya's time. HT had an article on this & also stated that broadcasters had to play the ball. So whatever has happen is continuation rather than new thing.

 

[Sureshot]

Whats worrisome about it ????

- BCCI are controlling peoples opinions.

What about that contractual obligation now ????????

Well, if he didn't oblige to it he would be out of a TV commentary job in England for a long time.

Also dont tell me Atherton is dependent on cricket commentary for his living .

No, he doesn't.

His contractual obligations are towards SKY not towards Nimbus or BCCI so he could easily have backed out or atleast didnt take his pay cheque in dissent.

If he backed out, sky might've fired him.

Hypocrite because he changes his views as per his convenience.

Again, prove where he has changed his views.

You can't, can you?

Replied within.

The BCCI are a hinderance at the very least towards the game today.

 

[harishankar]

Oh, I'm sure every board out there has some norms on what can be discussed on air by commentators and what cannot.

I think the ECB and the Australian board would have similar rules when a situation like that... In fact, I'm pretty sure they d.

It was a special situation (Ganguly issue) that demanded that people observe the decorum and not add fuel to the fire... it's only a responsible board which makes such requests of commentators and ask them to refrain from bringing up sensitive issues.

I think commentators need to have a sense of proportion and not rattle off their silly little mouths like spoilt brats when they cannot have their way...

 

[m_vaughan]

Oh, I'm sure every board out there has some norms on what can be discussed on air by commentators and what cannot.

I think the ECB and the Australian board would have similar rules when a situation like that... In fact, I'm pretty sure they d.

It was a special situation (Ganguly issue) that demanded that people observe the decorum and not add fuel to the fire... it's only a responsible board which makes such requests of commentators and ask them to refrain from bringing up sensitive issues.

I think commentators need to have a sense of proportion and not rattle off their silly little mouths like spoilt brats when they cannot have their way...

Agreed to an extent. But boards besides India's BCCI have given the production and broadcast rights to private channels. They have no control on the commentators, as they are hired by the channel.

Imo, the BCCI should limit its activities to just that of a cricket board and not venture into additional territory.

Whats worrisome about it ????

What about that contractual obligation now ????????

Also dont tell me Atherton is dependent on cricket commentary for his living .

His contractual obligations are towards SKY not towards Nimbus or BCCI so he could easily have backed out or atleast didnt take his pay cheque in dissent.

Hypocrite because he changes his views as per his convenience.

Contractual obligation lasts only during the tournament (series). Besides, as was mentioned before, he was after all representing Britain in the commentary box, so it would be foolish for him to leave because of problems between the BCCI and Ganguly.

He was contracted to Channel 4 till now, and not Sky.

Also he had just aired his views, and never changed them, as he had nothing to change.

 

[harishankar]

It is a bit worrisome that the BCCI is exerting so much influence, but then I've always expressed my concerns.

I think on this particular issue though that any instructions or requests that the BCCI may have made were perfectly proper...

Other issues regarding the BCCI are much more worrisome... I am generally also annoyed, like many others, the way BCCI choose to impose themselves on production and telecast issues.

 

[Sureshot]

Ok, let's presume (as that's what this is all on) that Athers is right about it.

Surely one of the key things in the commentary box is to discuss who was selected and who was dropped?

 

[harishankar]

In general, I don't see too many commentators ever debate selection issues in the com-box. I agree, there have been occasions in the past, but rarely do I see commentators speak out their minds in the commentary box. They usually compliment the selectors, but rarely do they openly criticize selectors... maybe they do it in an indirect manner, but rarely have I seen open discussion on selection issues...

Perhaps a few people like Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar don't hesitate to call a spade a spade. But that's because they work for independent production houses and are not related in any official way to the BCCI or the selection panel.

Sometimes I feel that commentators sugar coat things too much. But we've come to expect that and we can understand that they are sometimes restrained either by others or on their own from talking about sensitive issues.

The BCCI issuing such instructions in a particular case are understandable because they have seen the end of the Chappell-Ganguly spat and don't want to fuel the fires again. I think they also felt that they also owed it to the selectors to back up their bold decisions in making changes and not put them under too much pressure.

A lot of internal politics is involved, which perhaps the English wouldn't understand... I can see why Atherton complains, but he cannot be as naive as that to believe that everywhere else he has a free reign to say what's on his mind.

 

[icyman]

In general, I don't see too many commentators ever debate selection issues in the com-box. I agree, there have been occasions in the past, but rarely do I see commentators speak out their minds in the commentary box. They usually compliment the selectors, but rarely do they openly criticize selectors... maybe they do it in an indirect manner, but rarely have I seen open discussion on selection issues...

Perhaps a few people like Ravi Shastri and Sunil Gavaskar don't hesitate to call a spade a spade. But that's because they work for independent production houses and are not related in any official way to the BCCI or the selection panel.

Firstly,the BCCI Presidential Body i.e, the people who control the game in India,that is I.S.Bindra,Lalit Modi,Pawar,Amin are not cricket players.Forget them being cricket players,they have'nt even re-presented a Ranji team.I'm also not saying that people from the Jagmohan Dalmiya camp did.

Next,people like Gavaskar and Shashtri have a lot of command over their language and they were also great exponents of the game.They would naturally feel if anything goes against the cricketing mind.I believe that each cricketer should be allowed to speak out his mind.

Infatc,ppl should discuss the selction policy which has come under fire for More's antics.Ppl like More who drag their personal vendettas and interests into the game must be bought out in the open.

One more is is that,as i have mentioned before the BCCI is meddling a lot in the game.For example,telecast having the BCCI logo,which looks really cheap.
The BCCI has given the rights to a private company and therefore should not issue directives to the commentators to "do or to not to do ".