I seriously think this matter is getting blown way out of proportion. Spirit or no spirit, those who appealed for Inzi’s wicket had a right to and lets leave it at that.
Summary of the article: Inzi not happy at the unsportsman appeal and thinks this might leave a sour taste in pak-india cricket relationships.
I personally think pak-india cricket relationships were soured when the almighty Shoaib Akhtar let rip a 90 mph beamer at dhoni and didnt bother to apologize. Again, he doesnt have to apologize but what he did was totally against the spirit of the game and not apologizing made it worse. Why didnt then inzi come up to the press and apologize to indian cricket on behalf of Shoaib?
I find this whole holier-than-thou attitude kinda disturbing.
Well! Since both nations have disputes setting them apart many a miles,,, than why fight over these cricketing issues. Jusr stop playing with each other until either side learns to take a defeat or Wins gracefuly.
Yes! These small or big issues will be blwon out of proportions visibly because of the Indian's attitude. Its all in front of us in 3D colors.
Pakistan has played better cricket than the Indians over the years and this trend continues to dominate the emotional nerves of the Indian janta.
Remember! Both counteries have lost two venues beacuse of the Indian lethargy. Toronto - Sahara-cup & Sharjah,,,
Inzi Is Quite Right Dravid 11 Shouldnt Appeal for tht He was Not Taking run He just Save Himself for getting serious injury.Ball was Was nt driving to the stumps poor Dravid And Rootu Indians
Shih Haray:cb:
Just because Shoaib didn’t appear to apologize on the field, doesn’t mean he didn’t apologize. Afterwards both Shoaib and Dhoni acknowledged that it was an accident. Just like the beamer Sreesanth bowled to Razzaq, it was also an accident.
You cannot compare beamers to deliberate and petty exploitation of the rules. During the test series, batsmen on both sides occassionally handed the ball back to the bowler. Neither side ever appealed. But now the pressure is on the Indians and it is showing.
Here is a good article on the whole incident:
Inzamam-ul-Haq’s unusual dismissal and Dravid’s shame
From Shahed Sadullah
Editor The News London
LONDON: It does not take much for the gloves to come off in an India-Pakistan series. In the first One-day International as India were slowly sinking towards defeat, Pakistan’s captain Inzamam-ul-Haq played a ball to mid off, took barely a step out of his crease without any intention of taking a run when the mid-off fielder threw the ball towards the batsman rather than the stumps.
Inzamam stopped the ball with his bat and took a step back into his crease. The Indians appealed vociferously and since there had been a technical infringement, Umpire Taufel rightly ruled Inzamam out obstructing the field.
No one can fault the umpire in his interpretation of the rules of the game though one has to cast grave doubts on the Indian players’ interpretation of the spirit of the game. It is extremely disappointing that Dravid thought it fit to go ahead with the appeal and one would perhaps not be wrong in feeling that had the Pakistanis been 125 for seven at that juncture, the appeal would probably not have taken place.
No matter how good or bad Dravid’s tenure is as a captain from an Indian point of view, from a Pakistani viewpoint this will for ever a black mark against his otherwise highly respected name.
It is quite evident that the Indian dressing room has been rattled and well they might be because up to this point, they have got absolutely nothing to show for this tour. They lost the Test series after an abject batting performance at Karachi and are now trailing in the one day series.
Coach Greg Chappell’s reported remarks about the action of Shoaib Akhtar were, if reported accurately, clearly out of order and Chappell’s association with the game has been long enough for him to know that. There can be no question that he does not know where the line is or that he was clearly over-stepping it, but when frustration gets the better of a person, it blurs his judgment.
That is what happened with both Chappell and Dravid. The downside of all this is that a high level of frustration is not the best ingredient for an improved performance on the field and usually, frustration leads to poorer output. Frustration and failure feed each other with frustration causing more failure on the field which in turn causes greater frustration leading to poorer performance. One sincerely hopes that the Indians have not got into that sort of a mindset for if they have, things can only go downhill from here.
It is said that pressure brings out the real man, and so it is in Indo-Pak relations on all fronts. The slightest bit of pressure and the gloves come off, with people falling back on the old positions of mistrust and antagonism. The Indian appeal against Inzamam was right out of the pages of the cold war between the two countries when a cricket match meant that you had to win by whatever means, as if the issue of Kashmir was going to be decided on the field of play.
Inzamam’s laid back approach has now cost him dearly the second time around in the last few months. He has to realise that the approach he plays with belonged to a cricketing era that no longer exists and when push comes to shove, the rules will be pushed to the limit and the spirit will be bent beyond recognition.
The incident should prove not only to him but to many other Pakistani players who make many visible allowances for the spirit of the game, that that is something they cannot take for granted any more.
pakistanis have a habbit of making issues ..... india did not make a issue about the objects thrown on sachin Tendulkar (karachi test) and irfan pathan (peshwar ODI) neither they made a issue out of the intentional disrespect towards indian flag on ODI tickets .......
I think what has happened has gone and this matter should be closed now. Inzi has made his feelings clear, the only thing that is good is that it spices up the rest of the ODI's
a example of ‘the indian style’ The pleasant surprise of the ongoing Cricket World Cup from an Indian point of view is not that Sachin Tendulkar has confirmed his status as the best batsman in the world, but that India’s trio of fast bowlers is the fastest legal bowling attack in the world.
During this 2003 World Cup, Shoaib Akhtar of Pakistan sent down the fastest delivery ever recorded in cricket: a 161.3 Kph or 100.2 mph thunderbolt, the second time he has broken the 100 mph barrier, standing alone as the 100 mph man of cricket, while Brett Lee of Australia followed him closely at 160.7/99.8 mph – frustratingly close but not across the 100 mph mark.
However, both of these bowlers are widely suspected of throwing or “chucking”: using an action which is illegal based on the rules of the game. Both have been reported to the ICC by umpires for improper actions, but unfortunately both have been allowed to continue bowling after a brief period of time in which they were supposed to have worked on and corrected their action. Due to a variety of political forces within the ICC, they have not been called by officials since, although it is clear to most cricket fans that their actions have become more ragged than ever in the quest for speed in the premiere 4-yearly tournament, now ongoing in South Africa, one of the best places in the world to bowl fast due to its thinner atmosphere and bouncy pitches. Both these bowlers will be past their prime (at least in terms of speed) in the next World Cup.
To those that ever harbored doubts about the legality of Shoaib’s action, his delivery to dismiss Sachin Tendulkar in the game against India eliminated all such doubts, a throw shocking in its blatantness. Lee’s delivery to Sri Lankan captain Sanath Jayasuriya which injured his forearm and forced him to retire from the game was a similarly obvious chuck. Jermaine Lawson of the West Indies, a young up and coming bowler who has been clocked at a high speed of 95.2 mph, is also suspected of chucking by observers and experts. The world’s top spinner, rated by Wisden as the best ever bowler in Test cricket, Muthiah Muralitharan has also been accused by some of chucking, however, in his case the action does not affect the speed ratings as he is not a fast bowler.
Although the actions of all of these bowlers have been publicly questioned by many, the ICC has been reluctant to taken any action – the sort of politically motivated inaction from the world’s governing body that most cricket fans are accustomed to, and frustrated with, by now. A Sri Lankan bowler, Suresh Perera, was banned from bowling last year after an outcry over his action by English media and TV commentators, and remedial action ordered, but he has not made a re-appearance for his team since.
Here then are the fastest bowlers in the world with legal actions, based on the most current speeds recorded in the 2003 World Cup: 1. Shane Bond, New Zealand: 153.4 Kph / 95.3 mph 2. Ashish Nehra, India: 149.7 Kph / 93.0 mph 3. Makhaya Ntini, South Africa: 149.4 Kph / 92.8 mph 4. Jason Gillespie, Australia: 148.3 Kph / 92.1 mph 5. Dilhara Fernando, Sri Lanka: 147.9 Kph / 91.9 mph 6. Zaheer Khan, India: 147.4 Kph / 91.6 mph
A pleasant surprise to most Indian cricket followers is that the team with the fastest attack comprising strike bowlers with legal actions is India’s pace trio Ashish Nehra, Zaheer Khan, and Javagal Srinath. And this is not counting Ajit Agarkar, on the bench for India through all the games so far, another bowler who sends down 145+ Kph zingers. Australia’s Lee would be replaced by Glenn McGrath, and Pakistan’s Shoaib by Mohammed Sami, neither of whom exceed the 140 Kph mark on a consistent basis. Few had expected India to top the fast bowling averages in this Cup. However, seeing how this attack has combined to give India a lethal strike force resulting in an unprecedented string of victories in the World Cup, combined with its powerful and acknowledged best batting lineup, it would not be surprising to see India overtake or at least challenge Australia for the top spot in one-day international cricket.
hahahahha Zaheer Khan and Nehra?? lol they can’t even bowl faster than Razzaq or for that matter Afridi’s spin is faster than their fastest bowl. Man Indian media needs to wake up and smell the chai!
"I would not have imagined that Rahul Dravid and his team would do such a thing. I am not bothered about my dismissal but an appeal made in an unsportsmanlike manner by the visiting team can have an adverse affect on the relations between the two opponents. I have surely asserted on my boys not to make much of the Peshawar incident. However, in my personal opinion the appeal was not made in a sporting manner. Instead, it just might have left a bad taste in the mouth."
[/quote]
Who wrote all this for Inzi. I know the "boys" part is prolly his own idea.
I think Inzi was fairly appealed and correctly given out. Nothing unsportsman like about it.
I also find Inzi's questioning of the four methods of dismissal in his article quite intriguing. I hope he is not put into a situation where he has to eat his words.
He is basically questioning the sportsmanship nature of the following four laws;
1- Out - Handling the ball
2- Out - Hitting the ball twice
3- Out - Obstructing the field
4- Out - Run Out Mankading (non-striker backs up ahead of bowler entering the delivery stride)
To me, all the above modes of dismissal are fair and square. Each of the methods decline the batsmen of acquiring an unfair advantage over the fielding side. For example, on #4, why should a non-striker be given an unfair advantage of a 'ahead start' which would make him complete a run which otherwise would have been impossible.
Inzi needs to not only read but also understand the laws of cricket. I remember seeing Wasim Bari explain to him after he was apparently upset in the pavillion at Peshawar.
Also, I think it's just a matter of time before an Indian on this forum will remind us of Sachin Tendulkar's run-out while avoiding an injury in Calcutta with 17 runs to win the test. Wasim Akram did NOT withdraw the appeal. If the umpires had correctly applied the law, SRT would not have been given out.
