Speedy Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 New reports that the English cricket team cheated in the 2005 Ashes series. http://www.foxsports.com.au/story/0,8659,24236065-23212,00.html 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 And Nathan Bracken was crucified by the English press for suggesting the same thing shortly after the tests. More bad English sportsmanship. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 Because the English are the worst sports in Cricket?? ER...maybe not......Can we all says "Symonds snick"? Or "2nd test vs India January 2008"? Yes I thought we could...... Here's a couple from 1981just to show this is not a new phenomena- "Lillee kicks Miandad in the shins" and "Underarm bowling" And it's not actually cheating to be chewing something in cricket, not to use that saliva on the ball. IMO the aussies are just pissed because someone else thought of something legal but dodgy before they did! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 The use of an artificial substance to shine the ball is cheating. Other have been fined for using sweets and sugar to shine the ball. This one is just a bit ironic given the kicking that Bracken got for making the allegation years ago. Or the whole debacle of England vs Pakistan and the forfeited test over allegations of ball tampering. When it comes down to it, the English are as cynical a pack of cheats as they always whine the Aussies are. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REVS Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 For fornication's sake. Get over it. It wasn't just the Pom reverse swing that won that Ashes series. They batted well, fielded well and played well all-round and were well led. Good luck to them, I say. Well played! Then they got thrashed next time they visited Down Under. Hee hee! Next appointment, the old Dart. We Aussies will lack some of our old faithfuls (Warne, McGrath, Gilchrist and, who knows, Hayden too) and so it could be a great series. All I want is a close contest. Considering Australia's long period of success in cricket in recent years, any Aussie fan who actually whines about the occasional loss really needs therapy! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 The use of an artificial substance to shine the ball is cheating. Other have been fined for using sweets and sugar to shine the ball. Yep - but not saliva. Rahul Dravid was found guilty of actually applying a sweet to the ball - not saliva, and other players have been informally accused of the same - . Sugar, lip balm and hair creams are simlarly supposedly applied directly to the ball. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SSgt Viljuri Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 A dastardly thing to do! [Removed a long joke involving a Kiwi sheep, some urine produced by the aforementioned creature, a very adorable social occasion involving participants of this noble pursuit they like to call Crickets, a little chit chat, more mingling and refreshments, most likely tea, perhaps a loveably Australian slacker and ex-convict pouring something into a cup belonging to an Englishman (wombat piss, if Bruce drank all the urine by himself for some peculiar antipodean sounding reason), a sip, highly esteemed English gentleman swallowing his tea quite laboriously and audibly, the Ozzie filibuster pointing his pinky and asking innocently: What's the matter, old chap?] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Yep - but not saliva. Rahul Dravid was found guilty of actually applying a sweet to the ball - not saliva, and other players have been informally accused of the same - . Sugar, lip balm and hair creams are simlarly supposedly applied directly to the ball. You can't have it both ways. The underarm bowling was technically not a breach of the rules. It was as unsporting as hell and had no moral right to take place though. So it is with the sweets. They are being used to create a situation that could not be obtained with natural resources. They are therefore artificial. And in a court of law, we could also talk about the intent. Trescothick's own admission is that they were artificially trying to influence the motion of the ball. Dravid was just stupid in that he took the sweet out of his mouth. Cheats. Pure and simple. And worse cheats than even the All Blacks because the English always try and maintain this holier than thou image. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Saliva isn't illegal, and there's nothing in the rules saying you can't use it if you've been sucking anything - not even a raw prawn! So not illegal - therefore not cheating. Tough. Worse cheats than the all-blacks because the Aussies used to be able to beat them easily cheating, but now they're "cheating" themselves they're no longer easy beats. Aww...didums!! Mummy wipe up th tears for you!! And how about them Wallabies.... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Ross Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 Strewth cobber! No-one whines like an Aussie these days, you even have the in-bred nasal accent for it. Honestly, I can't recall anyone over here 'whinging' about Oddies in my whole lifetime. Any nation that takes sport so seriously is utterly without any sense of fun and imagination and is fooked in the long run I tell 'ya. Especially cricket. Oh, cricket is a game for men of wit, patience and intelligence, which is what seperates us all from those ghastly win-at-all-costs flag waving types, you know who they are. Cheer up, you thumped us more times than I can ever remember thumping your lot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted September 1, 2008 Share Posted September 1, 2008 And how about them Wallabies.... Erratic would be the word that comes to mind. It seems we're working on a one game on, one game off basis. I should have known better than to stay up. Every time I stay up to watch a SA game, we lose. The few that I miss, we win. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 Trescothick was referring to the 2001 Ashes, which Australia won. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
REVS Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 No he wasn't. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wicky Posted September 3, 2008 Share Posted September 3, 2008 NZ have developed special below the belt bowling trousers with built in polishing and roughening patches (the latter drooped), with presumably an English version includes a pocket for storing jelly beans and other sweets High-tech trousers Kiwi secret weapon PS not Rules of Cricket but Laws (inc. loopholes for polo mints!) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soddball Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 No he wasn't. Yes he was. I misread to begin with, but he referred to both the 2001 and 2005 Ashes series. The Aussies won the 2001 series. Clear evidence of Perfidious Poms at work, losing like that to lull you in to a false sense of security. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Bates Posted September 4, 2008 Share Posted September 4, 2008 You can't have it both ways. The underarm bowling was technically not a breach of the rules. It was as unsporting as hell and had no moral right to take place though. So it is with the sweets. They are being used to create a situation that could not be obtained with natural resources. They are therefore artificial. And in a court of law, we could also talk about the intent. Trescothick's own admission is that they were artificially trying to influence the motion of the ball. Dravid was just stupid in that he took the sweet out of his mouth. Cheats. Pure and simple. And worse cheats than even the All Blacks because the English always try and maintain this holier than thou image. Lighten up it's just a game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.