ECB's handmaiden ICC has ignored Ajmal from the awards shortlist.
They didn't have answer to them on the field and have summoned their cunning to hand him this ignominy. Shame on them.
Glad Pak is not taking this lying down and is fighting back.
Printable View
ECB's handmaiden ICC has ignored Ajmal from the awards shortlist.
They didn't have answer to them on the field and have summoned their cunning to hand him this ignominy. Shame on them.
Glad Pak is not taking this lying down and is fighting back.
illaingaRIngaLA? Unga Swann listla illainavudanE, backdoor entry kodukka mudinjudhE? ippO apdillama oru muRai achadicha list-ai marubadiyum maatha mudiyAdhAmE?
ippO idhu mattum just coincidencenu nambaRIngaLA?
Adhu epdi ungalukku sadhagamAve idhellaam ovvoru muRaiyum nadakkudhu?
Something fishynu kooda thONalaiyA? Revenge or not, someone is playing games here.
As I said, true revolution is in capturing ICC committees, admin positions and playing such games. Enakku NS mAma vaaippu koduthaal adhai ellaam paNNI, I'll put the boot on other foot. ipdi pala coincidencela vellaikaaran teams mattum suffer AguRA mAdhiri paNNuvEN. appOvum nInga paal maNam mARAdha baalaganAvE ellaam coincidencenu nambuvingannu nambaREn.
Yesterday Australia Vs Pakistan T20 was a tie and Pakistan won in the super over.
Can you believe it, Australia is now #10 in T20 rank table :lol2: below Bangladesh and Ireland. Apparently George Bailey T20 captain is not pleased with the ranking system.
http://www.espncricinfo.com/pakistan...ry/581389.html
Btw, Daniel Christian took a stunner!!!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KmDUGAvYlw
Btw
Dunno about Swann history. If you feel it was 'unfairly' reopened last time then I guess it doesn't make a case for it being reopened unless there is reason to believe there was foul play afoot. The non-selection itself is not proof enough IMO. Has there been any info about the judges and processes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Plum
summA ungaLai maadhiri 'something is afoot'-nu sindhichchu pArththEn. nallA dhaan 'yA irukku :lol2:
Doesn't seem fishy yet. Who do you think is playing games? Some English Lord who had troubles with spin bowling?Quote:
Originally Posted by Plum
naanum oru vaaram paarththEn Ian Gould decision paththi pEsureengaLA-nu. saththamE varalai :lol2:Quote:
Originally Posted by Plum
As coincidence will have it, it is the same Gould who gave that shocker to Chanderpaul in Bridgetwon (and thus helped draw the match which gave the World number one India, its only series win outside the subcontinent.
Of course I am not quick to suspect here either. Human error. That's all.
You re the establishment(Not just in the sense that you are supporting England, which is the establishment - in many other ways, you ARE the establishment)
Therefore, you are unable to see the viewpoint of the anti-establishment
The only way to make you understand is we become the estblishemnt and give a a dose of your medicine. appO indha poRumai, nidhAnamlAm engE pOgudhunnu nAnum pAkkuREn.
It is easy to take the moral high horse when YOU ARE the establishment.
(Not just in Englad Cricket support)
Playing the victim. Always pleasurable.
Contextualize as appropriate.
No, Being the establishment . Now, that's pleasurable. Not only can you have your way but also moralize on how the etablishment is spotless, and the victims are whining.
As I said, the onyl way to make you feel is to have the boot on your throat. Neither England nor you will allow that to happen. That is the beauty of your lives.
:smug smile: followed by :evil grin:
Saad Shafaq on Ajmal http://www.espncricinfo.com/magazine...ry/581424.html
The article goes on to argue why Ajmal was better than Philander when all 3 formats are considered. The argument isn't well made.Quote:
The feeling has been compounded by a misconception still prevailing in some quarters that Ajmal's exclusion was similar to Graeme Swann's in 2010. Swann was included after a public outcry; the fact that Ajmal hasn't been feels like a double insult.
But the two cases are different. Swann hadn't made it onto the longlist, which is picked by a five-member panel of selectors in a consensus exercise, that allows for decisions to be reconsidered. Ajmal has made it onto the longlist but failed to garner enough support at the next level, a private ballot by the 32-member voting academy that whittles the longlist down to a handful of nominees. This is a confidential exercise handled by a major management consulting firm.
In a nutshell, while Swann failed to get selected, Ajmal failed to get elected.
btw aren't the awards usually by format?